Language Models Can Teach Themselves to Program Better
Open accessAbstract
Recent Language Models (LMs) achieve breakthrough performance in code generation when trained on human-authored problems, even solving some competitive-programming problems. Self-play has proven useful in games such as Go, and thus it is natural to ask whether LMs can generate their own instructive programming problems to improve their performance. We show that it is possible for an LM to synthesize programming problems and solutions, which are filtered for correctness by a Python interpreter. The LM's performance is then seen to improve when it is fine-tuned on its own synthetic problems and verified solutions; thus the model 'improves itself' using the Python interpreter. Problems are specified formally as programming puzzles [Schuster et al., 2021], a code-based problem format where solutions can easily be verified for correctness by execution. In experiments on publicly-available LMs, test accuracy more than doubles. This work demonstrates the potential for code LMs, with an interpreter, to generate instructive problems and improve their own performance.
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.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Will we run out of data? Limits of LLM scaling based on human-generated data
Villalobos, P., Ho, A., Sevilla, J., Besiroglu, T., Heim, L., & Hobbhahn, M. (2022) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2211.04325 · Cited by 80 · see citing works
“On the other hand, training on synthetic data has shown much promise in domains where model outputs are relatively easy to verify, such as mathematics, programming, and games (Yang et al., 2023; Liu et al., 2023; Haluptzok et al., 2023).”
BackgroundLearning Performance-Improving Code Edits
Shypula, A., Madaan, A., Zeng, Y., Alon, U., Gardner, J., Hashemi, M., Neubig, G., Ranganathan, P., Bastani, O., & Yazdanbakhsh, A. (2023) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2302.07867 · Cited by 23 · see citing works
“This methodology aligns with self-play and self-instruct approachs in neural program synthesis (Haluptzok et al., 2022; Rozière et al., 2023).”
MethodAbsolute Zero: Reinforced Self-play Reasoning with Zero Data
Zhao, A., Wu, Y., Yue, Y., Wu, T., Xu, Q., Yue, Y., Lin, M., Wang, S., Wu, Q., Zheng, Z., et al. (2025) · arXiv · Cited by 13 · see citing works
Wang, Z. Z., Mao, J., Fried, D., & Neubig, G. (2024) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2409.07429 · Cited by 5 · see citing works
“Other works explore ways to augment agent memory, such as adding example demonstrations in context (Haluptzok et al., 2023; Zheng et al., 2024; Fu et al., 2024).”
BackgroundSelf-Taught Optimizer (STOP): Recursively Self-Improving Code Generation
Zelikman, E., Lorch, E., Mackey, L., & Kalai, A. T. (2023) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2310.02304 · Cited by 4 · see citing works
“Schmidhuber (2003) first provided a rigorous formalization, wherein a problem solver would leverage itself to solve iteratively harder problems by making provable improvements to itself.”
BackgroundSelf-citation
- Authors
- Haluptzok, P., Bowers, M., & Kalai, A. T.
- Affiliations
- Microsoft (United States) (US)
- Massachusetts Institute of Technology (US)
- ORCID
- Kalai, Adam Tauman
- Venue
- arXiv
- Publisher
- arXiv
- Published
- 2022
- ISSN
- 2331-8422 (ISSN-L)
- arXiv
- 2207.14502
- OpenAlex
- W4289445724
- Cited by
- 19
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2026: 1 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 8 · 2023: 7
- Type
- posted content
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- arxiv.org
- Locations
- arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
- arXiv (Cornell University)
- 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
- self-play, code generation, programming puzzles, fine-tuning, code LLMs
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
