AixBench: A Code Generation Benchmark Dataset
Open accessAbstract
We present a benchmark dataset for evaluating method-level code generation task. The benchmark contains a dataset of 175 samples for automated evaluation and a dataset of 161 samples for manual evaluation. We also present a new metric for automatically evaluating the correctness of the generated code, and a set of criteria to manually evaluating the overall quality of the generated code.
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?
Execution-based metrics that require providing test cases are expensive to conduct in practice.
“Executionbased metrics (Kulal et al., 2019;Hao et al., 2022;Hendrycks et al., 2021;Rozière et al., 2020;Dong et al., 2023) that require providing test cases are expensive to conduct in practice”
From CodeTransOcean: A Comprehensive Multilingual Benchmark for Code Translation (2023) · cites this paper as Hao et al., 2022
The Backgrounds and Related Work section (p. 2) says the automated dataset uses hand-crafted test cases, and the Experiment section (pp. 4–5) describes metrics based on passing those cases. The paper does not state that execution-based metrics are expensive to conduct in practice; searches for cost, effort, and time-consuming test preparation did not find that point. (LLM, conf=0.83)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe significant overhead of executing numerous test cases and the heightened security risks during the execution process remain unresolved.
“the significant overhead of executing numerous test cases and the heightened security risks during the execution process remain unresolved.”
From CodeTransOcean: A Comprehensive Multilingual Benchmark for Code Translation (2023) · cites this paper as Hao et al., 2022
The Backgrounds and Related Work section (p. 2) says the benchmark uses several hand-crafted test cases to check generated code. The Experiment section (pp. 4–5) reports test-case-based metrics. Neither passage addresses execution overhead or security risks; searches for those concerns found no passage that does. (LLM, conf=0.73)
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.
No citation lists for this paper
No citation lists for this paper yet — checked again daily.
Cited by 14
- Authors
- Hao, Y., Li, G., Liu, Y., Miao, X., Zong, H., Jiang, S., Liu, Y., & Wei, H.
- Affiliations
- aiXcoder
- Peking University (CN)
- ORCID
- Zong, He
- Venue
- arXiv
- Publisher
- arXiv
- Published
- 2022
- ISSN
- 2331-8422 (ISSN-L)
- arXiv
- 2206.13179
- OpenAlex
- W6901758419
- Cited by
- 14
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2025: 5 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 3
- Type
- posted content
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- arxiv.org
- Locations
- arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
- arXiv (Cornell University) (cc-by)
- Greater South Information System
- 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 › Software › Software Testing and Debugging Techniques
- Keywords
- code generation, benchmark dataset, program synthesis
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
