SearcharxivSearch

arXiv · 2508.11468

TRACE: Evaluating Execution Efficiency of LLM-Based Code Translation

Abstract

While Large Language Models (LLMs) have substantially improved the functional correctness of code translation, the critical dimension of execution efficiency remains overlooked. We present \textbf{\textsc{Trace}}, the first benchmark to explicitly assess efficiency in LLM-translated code. \textsc{Trace} includes 1,000 efficiency-critical tasks across C++, Java, and Python, each augmented with stress tests that reveal efficiency disparities often overlooked by small-scale tests. Using \textsc{Trace}, we conduct an extensive evaluation of 28 representative LLMs and highlight several key insights: 1) Correctness and efficiency are often misaligned: the correctness leader Claude-Sonnet-4-Think achieves only moderate time efficiency, outperformed by smaller open-source LLMs such as Qwen2.5-Coder-14B-Instruct. 2) Inefficiency is both prevalent and patterned: 23.5\% of correct translations suffer from notable inefficiency, mainly arising from algorithm implementation discrepancy (11.9\%), language construct mismatch (66.4\%), and resource management inefficiency (21.7\%). 3) Inference-time prompt strategies bring only modest improvements, indicating that simple prompting alone is insufficient to improve translation efficiency. Together, our results establish execution efficiency as an essential dimension of code translation and position \textsc{Trace} as a principled foundation for efficiency-oriented evaluation.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

BibTeXRIS

Zhihao Gong, Zeyu Sun, Dong Huang, Qingyuan Liang, Jie M. Zhang, Dan Hao. 2026-08-31. TRACE: Evaluating Execution Efficiency of LLM-Based Code Translation. https://arxiv.org/abs/2508.11468

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

Discover connections

Connections use source metadata and explicit phrase matches, not verified experimental comparisons.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related discoveries

Antipatterns in AI-assisted Qualitative Data Analysis: A Catalog of Temptations and Pitfalls for Software Engineering Researchers

AI-assisted qualitative data analysis (QDA) offers unprecedented opportunities to streamline software engineering (SE) research, yet uncritical use risks compromising analytical rigor and flooding the field with accelerated production of low-quality research. While tactical best practices will naturally evolve over time, SE researchers currently lack strategic guidance to identify and mitigate methodological risks when attempting AI-assisted QDA. Based on our decades of qualitative SE research expertise and experience combined with an understanding of the emerging landscape of AI-assisted QDA, this paper presents a catalog of antipatterns in AI-assisted QDA - a set of assumptions and practices that initially appear advantageous but ultimately undermine analytical rigor and validity. The antipatterns are grouped into three categories reflecting escalating impact: Dangerous Drivers, Operational Missteps, and Analytical Failures. As more SE researchers attempt AI-assisted QDA, these antipatterns will help them identify and avoid common temptations and pitfalls, while reviewers can be equipped with the vocabulary and criteria to call out problematic and failed practice. Ultimately, this catalog of antipatterns can serve as a stepping stone in our responsible methodological evolution toward principled and meaningful human-AI collaboration in qualitative research.

cs.SE

What Does an Evaluation License? A Commit-Bound Census of Claim Replay in Inspect Evals

Benchmarks can run without determining what their results license. We freeze a large evaluation collection and attempt to replay its historical claims. Most units stop because the evidence required for replay is not bound. Where replay is possible, different claims remain stable at different resolutions. We make this otherwise implicit inference step explicit and executable.

cs.SE

Augmenting software engineering with AI - The ai4se taxonomy and its use

Although model-driven software engineering (MDSE) has proven effective in managing complex systems, its industrial adoption remains limited by the substantial maintenance overhead required for models and the specialised skills demanded of developers. Meanwhile, advances in artificial intelligence (AI), particularly generative and agentic AI, have shown great promise in automating code-related tasks such as comprehension, generation, and defect detection. These capabilities are largely powered by 'big code': vast repositories of open-source software that now form the basis of data-driven, empirical SE and automated quality assurance. This paper aims to synthesise these two domains by exploring the integration of AI into model-driven practices. It provides a comprehensive overview of the current state of AI-augmented software engineering and introduces a novel taxonomy 'ai4se' to classify and connect diverse AI applications within the field. On this basis, the paper proposes a vision for 'big models' in software engineering (SE), an approach designed to leverage the structural advantages of MDSE alongside the scalability of AI. Finally, the paper discusses the pair modelling paradigm as a collaborative framework for the MDSE industry, designed to enhance software quality through human-AI partnership.

cs.SE