Competition-Level Code Generation with AlphaCode
Open accessAbstract
Programming is a powerful and ubiquitous problem-solving tool. Developing systems that can assist programmers or even generate programs independently could make programming more productive and accessible, yet so far incorporating innovations in AI has proven challenging. Recent large-scale language models have demonstrated an impressive ability to generate code, and are now able to complete simple programming tasks. However, these models still perform poorly when evaluated on more complex, unseen problems that require problem-solving skills beyond simply translating instructions into code. For example, competitive programming problems which require an understanding of algorithms and complex natural language remain extremely challenging. To address this gap, we introduce AlphaCode, a system for code generation that can create novel solutions to these problems that require deeper reasoning. In simulated evaluations on recent programming competitions on the Codeforces platform, AlphaCode achieved on average a ranking of top 54.3% in competitions with more than 5,000 participants. We found that three key components were critical to achieve good and reliable performance: (1) an extensive and clean competitive programming dataset for training and evaluation, (2) large and efficient-to-sample transformer-based architectures, and (3) large-scale model sampling to explore the search space, followed by filtering based on program behavior to a small set of submissions.
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
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?
Metrics and datasets for code generation models test how well the model can complete code in an offline setting without developer input rather than evaluating how well such recommendations assist programmers in situ.
“However, in each case, these metrics test how well the model can complete code in an ofine setting without developer input rather than evaluating how well such recommendations assist programmers in situ.”
From Reading Between the Lines: Modeling User Behavior and Costs in AI-Assisted Programming (2024) · cites this paper as [21]
Section 7.4 (p. 29) describes metrics that assess generated code against reference code or by executing programs; Section 2.2 (p. 6) describes a benchmark based on problems solved by model-generated submissions. These support the point that the paper's metrics assess model output rather than how recommendations help programmers, but the paper does not establish the broader claim about code-generation metrics and datasets generally, nor does it explicitly contrast them with assistance in situ. (LLM, conf=0.78)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Cites
No references could be resolved yet.
This paper’s reference list could not be split into single entries.
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Grounded Copilot: How Programmers Interact with Code-Generating Models
Barke, S., James, M. B., & Polikarpova, N. (2023) · Proceedings of the ACM on Programming Languages · doi:10.1145/3586030 · Cited by 436 · see citing works
CodeGeeX: A Pre-Trained Model for Code Generation with Multilingual Benchmarking on HumanEval-X
Zheng, Q., Xia, X., Zou, X., Dong, Y., Wang, S., Xue, Y., Shen, L., Wang, Z., Wang, A., Li, Y., et al. (2023) · Proceedings of the 29th ACM SIGKDD Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining · doi:10.1145/3580305.3599790 · Cited by 263 · see citing works
Self-citationPrather, J., Reeves, B. N., Denny, P., Becker, B. A., Leinonen, J., Luxton-Reilly, A., Powell, G., Finnie-Ansley, J., & Santos, E. A. (2024) · ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction · doi:10.1145/3617367 · Cited by 256 · see citing works
AutoCodeRover: Autonomous Program Improvement
Zhang, Y., Ruan, H., Fan, Z., & Roychoudhury, A. (2024) · Proceedings of the 33rd ACM SIGSOFT International Symposium on Software Testing and Analysis · doi:10.1145/3650212.3680384 · Cited by 202 · see citing works
AutoCodeRover: Autonomous Program Improvement
Zhang, Y., Ruan, H., Fan, Z., & Roychoudhury, A. (2024) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2404.05427 · Cited by 202 · see citing works
Using GitHub Copilot to Solve Simple Programming Problems
Wermelinger, M. (2023) · Proceedings of the 54th ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education V. 1 · doi:10.1145/3545945.3569830 · Cited by 191 · see citing works
MultiPL-E: A Scalable and Polyglot Approach to Benchmarking Neural Code Generation
Cassano, F., Gouwar, J., Nguyen, D., Nguyen, S., Phipps-Costin, L., Pinckney, D., Yee, M.-H., Zi, Y., Anderson, C. J., Feldman, M. Q., et al. (2023) · IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering · doi:10.1109/tse.2023.3267446 · Cited by 109 · see citing works
Reading Between the Lines: Modeling User Behavior and Costs in AI-Assisted Programming
Mozannar, H., Bansal, G., Fourney, A., & Horvitz, E. (2024) · Proceedings of the CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems · doi:10.1145/3613904.3641936 · Cited by 114 · see citing works
Long-form factuality in large language models
Wei, J., Yang, C., Song, X., Lu, Y., Hu, N., Huang, J., Tran, D., Peng, D., Liu, R., Huang, D., et al. (2024) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2403.18802 · Cited by 36 · see citing works
RLEF: Grounding Code LLMs in Execution Feedback with Reinforcement Learning
Gehring, J., Zheng, K., Copet, J., Mella, V., Carbonneaux, Q., Cohen, T., & Synnaeve, G. (2024) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2410.02089 · Cited by 23 · see citing works
When to Show a Suggestion? Integrating Human Feedback in AI-Assisted Programming
Mozannar, H., Bansal, G., Fourney, A., & Horvitz, E. (2024) · Proceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence · doi:10.1609/aaai.v38i9.28878 · Cited by 23 · see citing works
Focused Transformer: Contrastive Training for Context Scaling
Tworkowski, S., Staniszewski, K., Pacek, M., Wu, Y., Michalewski, H., & Milos, P. (2023) · Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 36 · doi:10.52202/075280-1849 · Cited by 18 · see citing works
McEval: Massively Multilingual Code Evaluation
Chai, L., Liu, S., Yang, J., Yin, Y., Jin, K., Liu, J., Sun, T., Zhang, G., Ren, C., Guo, H., et al. (2024) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2406.07436 · Cited by 1 · see citing works
OpenThoughts: Data Recipes for Reasoning Models
Guha, E., Marten, R., Keh, S., Raoof, N., Smyrnis, G., Bansal, H., Nezhurina, M., Mercat, J., Vu, T., Sprague, Z., et al. (2025) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2506.04178 · Cited by 1 · see citing works
Live-SWE-agent: Can Software Engineering Agents Self-Evolve on the Fly?
Xia, C. S., Wang, Z., Yang, Y., Wei, Y., & Zhang, L. (2025) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2511.13646 · Cited by 2 · see citing works
Paper2Code: Automating Code Generation from Scientific Papers in Machine Learning
Seo, M., Baek, J., Lee, S., & Hwang, S. J. (2025) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2504.17192
- Authors
- Li, Y., Choi, D., Chung, J., Kushman, N., Schrittwieser, J., Leblond, R., Eccles, T., Keeling, J., Gimeno, F., Lago, A. D., Hubert, T., Choy, P., d'Autume, C. D. M., Babuschkin, I., Chen, X., Huang, P.-S., Welbl, J., Gowal, S., Cherepanov, A., Molloy, J., Mankowitz, D. J., Robson, E. S., Kohli, P., de Freitas, N., Kavukcuoglu, K., & Vinyals, O.
- Affiliations
- Google DeepMind (United Kingdom) (GB)
- Corresponding author
- Li, Yujia
- Choi, David
- Chung, Junyoung
- Kushman, Nate
- Schrittwieser, Julian
- Leblond, Rémi
- Eccles, Tom
- Keeling, James
- Gimeno, Felix
- Lago, Agustin Dal
- Choy, Peter
- Vinyals, Oriol
- ORCID
- Venue
- arXiv
- Publisher
- arXiv
- Published
- 2022
- Volume
- 378
- Issue
- 6624
- Pages
- 1092-1097
- ISSN
- 0036-8075 (ISSN-L)
- arXiv
- 2203.07814
- OpenAlex
- W4226287673
- Cited by
- 1,043
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2026: 269 · 2025: 319 · 2024: 237 · 2023: 186 · 2022: 30 · 2014: 1
- FWCI
- 191.10
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- arxiv.org
- Locations
- Science (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
- arXiv (Cornell University) (cc-by)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Software Engineering Research
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Science Applications › Teaching and Learning Programming
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Topic Modeling
- Keywords
- automatic code generation, competitive programming, programming competition, Codeforces, transformer language models, AI-assisted programming
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
