The DOI matches its DataCite record.
A Preliminary Analysis on the Code Generation Capabilities of GPT-3.5 and Bard AI Models for Java Functions
Open accessAbstract
This paper evaluates the capability of two state-of-the-art artificial intelligence (AI) models, GPT-3.5 and Bard, in generating Java code given a function description. We sourced the descriptions from CodingBat.com, a popular online platform that provides practice problems to learn programming. We compared the Java code generated by both models based on correctness, verified through the platform's own test cases. The results indicate clear differences in the capabilities of the two models. GPT-3.5 demonstrated superior performance, generating correct code for approximately 90.6% of the function descriptions, whereas Bard produced correct code for 53.1% of the functions. While both models exhibited strengths and weaknesses, these findings suggest potential avenues for the development and refinement of more advanced AI-assisted code generation tools. The study underlines the potential of AI in automating and supporting aspects of software development, although further research is required to fully realize this potential.
Overview
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
Verification
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?
In the citing paper
“GPT models have been shown to handle a number of programming languages [5, 8].”
From Thrilled by Your Progress! Large Language Models (GPT-4) No Longer Struggle to Pass Assessments in Higher Education Programming Courses (2023) · cites this paper as [8]
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
A Survey of GPT-3 Family Large Language Models Including ChatGPT and GPT-4
Kalyan, K. S. (2024) · Natural Language Processing Journal · doi:10.1016/j.nlp.2023.100048 · Cited by 335
Savelka, J., Agarwal, A., An, M., Bogart, C., & Sakr, M. (2023) · Proceedings of the 2023 ACM Conference on International Computing Education Research V.1 · doi:10.1145/3568813.3600142 · Cited by 141
Metadata
- Authors
- Destefanis, G., Bartolucci, S., & Ortu, M.
- Affiliations
- Brunel University of London (GB)
- The London College (GB)
- University of Cagliari (IT)
- Venue
- arXiv
- Publisher
- arXiv
- Published
- 2023
- ISSN
- 2331-8422 (ISSN-L)
- arXiv
- 2305.09402
- OpenAlex
- W4377009756
- Cited by
- 16
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2025: 3 · 2024: 8 · 2023: 5
- Type
- posted content
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- arxiv.org
- Licence
- Locations
- arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
- Brunel University Research Archive (BURA) (Brunel University London) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
- 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 › Information Systems › Software Engineering Techniques and Practices
- Keywords
- AI-assisted code generation, GPT-3.5, Google Bard, Java programming, function description, program correctness, large language models, artificial intelligence in software development
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: A Preliminary Analysis on the Code Generation Capabilities of GPT-3.5 and Bard AI Models for Java Functions. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.48550/arxiv.2305.09402
- The paper
- Destefanis, G., Bartolucci, S., & Ortu, M. (2023). A Preliminary Analysis on the Code Generation Capabilities of GPT-3.5 and Bard AI Models for Java Functions. arXiv. https://doi.org/10.48550/arxiv.2305.09402
