Cited by 251Software Engineering ResearchTopic ModelingTeaching and Learning Programming

A Survey on Large Language Models for Code Generation

Open access
Jiang, Juyong, Wang, Fan, Shen, Jiasi, Kim, Sungju, Kim, Sunghun·2026·ACM Transactions on Software Engineering and Methodology

Published version of a preprint

Abstract

Large Language Models (LLMs) have garnered remarkable advancements across diverse code-related tasks, known as Code LLMs, particularly in code generation that generates source code with LLM from natural language descriptions. This burgeoning field has captured significant interest from both academic researchers and industry professionals due to its practical significance in software development, e.g., GitHub Copilot . Despite the active exploration of LLMs for a variety of code tasks, either from the perspective of Natural Language Processing (NLP) or Software Engineering (SE) or both, there is a noticeable absence of a comprehensive and up-to-date literature review dedicated to LLM for code generation. In this survey, we aim to bridge this gap by providing a systematic literature review that serves as a valuable reference for researchers investigating the cutting-edge progress in LLMs for code generation. We introduce a taxonomy to categorize and discuss the recent developments in LLMs for code generation, covering aspects such as data curation, latest advances, performance evaluation, ethical implications, environmental impact, and real-world applications. In addition, we present a historical overview of the evolution of LLMs for code generation and provide a quantitative and qualitative comparative analysis of experimental results of code LLMs, sourced from their original papers to ensure a fair comparison on the HumanEval, MBPP, and BigCodeBench benchmarks, across various levels of difficulty and types of programming tasks, to highlight the progressive enhancements in LLM capabilities for code generation. We identify critical challenges and promising opportunities regarding the gap between academia and practical development. Furthermore, we have established a dedicated resource GitHub page ( https://github.com/juyongjiang/CodeLLMSurvey ) to continuously document and disseminate the most recent advances in the field.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1145/3747588

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Simply accumulating natural language history cannot reliably support complex software engineering loops.

    “However, with the emergence of repository-level repair and other long-horizon coding tasks, it has become increasingly clear that simply accumulating natural language history cannot reliably support complex software engineering loops [180].”

    From Code as Agent Harness (2026) · cites this paper as [180]

  • These two scenarios (competition and repository-level) are summarized as representative dimensions of code generation benchmarks by Jiang et al. [35].

    “These two scenarios (competition and repository-level) are summarized as representative dimensions of code generation benchmarks by Jiang et al. [35].”

    From What Makes In-Context Examples Effective for Code Generation? (2026) · cites this paper as Jiang et al. [35]

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 89 · Cited by 251

Authors
Jiang, J., Wang, F., Shen, J., Kim, S., & Kim, S.
Affiliations
  • The Hong Kong University of Science and Technology (Guangzhou) (CN)
  • Hong Kong University of Science and Technology (HK)
  • NAVER Cloud (South Korea) (KR)
Venue
ACM Transactions on Software Engineering and Methodology
Published
2026-01-21
Volume
35
Issue
2
Pages
1-72
ISSN
  • 1049-331X (ISSN-L)
  • 1557-7392
OpenAlex
W7125135101
Cited by
251
References
89
Citations by year
2026: 147 · 2025: 93 · 2024: 11
FWCI
249.55
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
other-oa
Locations
  • ACM Transactions on Software Engineering and Methodology (publishedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • Rare & Special e-Zone (The Hong Kong University of Science and Technology) (submittedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Software Engineering Research
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Topic Modeling
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Science Applications › Teaching and Learning Programming
Keywords
large language models, code generation, code LLMs, natural language to code, data curation, performance evaluation, ethical implications, environmental impact, benchmark comparison, HumanEval, MBPP, GitHub Copilot, industry-academia gap

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review