CGEMs: A Metric Model for Automatic Code Generation using GPT-3

Aishwarya Narasimhan; Krishna Prasad Agara Venkatesha Rao; Veena M B

Home/Archive/arXiv

arXiv · 2108.10168

CGEMs: A Metric Model for Automatic Code Generation using GPT-3

Aishwarya Narasimhan·Krishna Prasad Agara Venkatesha Rao·Veena M B

View original source ↗Read source document ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

Today, AI technology is showing its strengths in almost every industry and walks of life. From text generation, text summarization, chatbots, NLP is being used widely. One such paradigm is automatic code generation. An AI could be generating anything; hence the output space is unconstrained. A self-driving car is driven for 100 million miles to validate its safety, but tests cannot be written to monitor and cover an unconstrained space. One of the solutions to validate AI-generated content is to constrain the problem and convert it from abstract to realistic, and this can be accomplished by either validating the unconstrained algorithm using theoretical proofs or by using Monte-Carlo simulation methods. In this case, we use the latter approach to test/validate a statistically significant number of samples. This hypothesis of validating the AI-generated code is the main motive of this work and to know if AI-generated code is reliable, a metric model CGEMs is proposed. This is an extremely challenging task as programs can have different logic with different naming conventions, but the metrics must capture the structure and logic of the program. This is similar to the importance grammar carries in AI-based text generation, Q&A, translations, etc. The various metrics that are garnered in this work to support the evaluation of generated code are as follows: Compilation, NL description to logic conversion, number of edits needed, some of the commonly used static-code metrics and NLP metrics. These metrics are applied to 80 codes generated using OpenAI's GPT-3. Post which a Neural network is designed for binary classification (acceptable/not acceptable quality of the generated code). The inputs to this network are the values of the features obtained from the metrics. The model achieves a classification accuracy of 76.92% and an F1 score of 55.56%. XAI is augmented for model interpretability.

Explore related subjects

cs.AI

Keep this discovery

BibTeX RIS

Aishwarya Narasimhan, Krishna Prasad Agara Venkatesha Rao, Veena M B. 2021-08-23. CGEMs: A Metric Model for Automatic Code Generation using GPT-3. https://arxiv.org/abs/2108.10168

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

arXiv2026

Decoupling Readiness from Release for Tail-Aware Scheduling of Agentic LLM Workflows

Agentic LLM workflows consist of sequences of model turns interleaved with tool interactions, so their end-to-end completion time depends not only on inference speed but also on when ready turns are released. Most runtimes release each turn immediately upon readiness. Under contention, this eager release policy can accumulate released but unfinished work; once submitted, those turns can no longer be reordered by the workflow-level policy, increasing tail latency. We present a tail-risk-aware turn release scheduling method that jointly decides which ready turn to release next and how much released but unfinished work to maintain. The method uses a mean--Conditional Value-at-Risk (CVaR) objective to capture the evolving tail risk of unfinished workflows, incorporates online estimates of turn work when prioritizing ready turns, and adapts the released work budget to observed queue pressure. We evaluate the method using real agent execution traces from software engineering tasks across multiple LLMs and workflow arrival rates. The method performs comparably to eager release under light load and substantially reduces the P95 of workflow flow time under contention, achieving up to a \(3.50\times\) speedup.

cs.AI↗

arXiv2026

Demystifying the Privacy-Utility Trade-off in LLM Interactions

The integration of Large Language Models into daily tasks relies on context-rich instructions, inevitably exposing sensitive user information. Current privacy-preserving methods typically employ context-agnostic static rules, causing severe utility degradation. However, the specific mechanisms governing how sanitization impacts downstream performance remain largely underexplored. To address this, we conduct a systematic analysis to deconstruct the privacy-utility trade-off, uncovering three underlying mechanisms: (1) Context-Dependent Utility, which first establishes when to sanitize by revealing that data value shifts from critical constraints to dispensable noise based on user intent; (2) Strategic Adaptation, which subsequently determines how to sanitize by dictating that the choice between removal and replacement depends on the task's reliance on factual integrity versus structural coherence; and (3) Combinatorial Interplay, which finally extends the protection scope by demonstrating that attributes form a semantic web of synergistic dependencies or antagonistic redundancies. Guided by these insights, we introduce an intent-driven local protection framework. By distilling a lightweight model Veilmind-4B to drive a dynamic extraction-sanitization-restoration pipeline, our approach reaches a low-leakage privacy point while preserving substantially higher response utility than existing privacy-oriented baselines, advancing the privacy-utility trade-off toward the Pareto frontier.

cs.AI↗

arXiv2026

Defining AI Agents: A Compendium of Criteria, Metrics, and Benchmarks

The term agent in artificial intelligence lacks a standard definition, complicating the evaluation, comparison, and reproducibility of AI agent research. We address this ambiguity through a survey organized around five dimensions of agenticness: environmental interaction, learning and adaptation, autonomy, goal-directed behavior, and temporal coherence. For each dimension, we examine how the underlying capability has been conceptualized across prior work and synthesize the metrics, benchmarks, and evaluation frameworks used to assess it. This review provides a structured account of the current landscape of agent evaluation, highlighting both established approaches and areas where evaluation remains limited or inconsistent. We additionally introduce the Agent Compendium, a public-facing digital resource that organizes and extends the evaluation methods identified through this review. Together, the survey and compendium provide a common structure for evaluating and comparing agent capabilities across AI systems, supporting more reproducible research, clearer communication, and more systematic study of artificial agents.

cs.AI↗