PreprintCited by 114Software Engineering ResearchSoftware Engineering Techniques and PracticesTopic Modeling

Large Language Models for Software Engineering: A Systematic Literature Review

Open access
Hou, Xinyi, Zhao, Yanjie, Liu, Yue, Yang, Zhou, Wang, Kailong, Li, Li, Luo, Xiapu, Lo, David +2 more·2023·arXiv

Abstract

Large Language Models (LLMs) have significantly impacted numerous domains, including Software Engineering (SE). Many recent publications have explored LLMs applied to various SE tasks. Nevertheless, a comprehensive understanding of the application, effects, and possible limitations of LLMs on SE is still in its early stages. To bridge this gap, we conducted a systematic literature review (SLR) on LLM4SE, with a particular focus on understanding how LLMs can be exploited to optimize processes and outcomes. We select and analyze 395 research papers from January 2017 to January 2024 to answer four key research questions (RQs). In RQ1, we categorize different LLMs that have been employed in SE tasks, characterizing their distinctive features and uses. In RQ2, we analyze the methods used in data collection, preprocessing, and application, highlighting the role of well-curated datasets for successful LLM for SE implementation. RQ3 investigates the strategies employed to optimize and evaluate the performance of LLMs in SE. Finally, RQ4 examines the specific SE tasks where LLMs have shown success to date, illustrating their practical contributions to the field. From the answers to these RQs, we discuss the current state-of-the-art and trends, identifying gaps in existing research, and flagging promising areas for future study. Our artifacts are publicly available at https://github.com/xinyi-hou/LLM4SE_SLR.

Integrity signals

Registry

DataCite · 10.48550/arxiv.2308.10620

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?

  • Neither of the two recent literature reviews mentions studies that directly target creativity.

    “Neither review mentions studies that directly target creativity, although it is indirectly hinted at when discussing potential research into hallucinations and whether the hallucinations could be harnessed in some way, e.g., to identify new features [36].”
  • There is no research that directly examines the impact of GenAI on creativity in software development.

    “Despite the plethora of new publications that have continue to emerge on the topic of LLMs and GenAI in software development, then, there is no research that directly examines the impact of GenAI on creativity in software development.”
  • Two recent literature reviews find the majority of research on LLMs in software engineering has focused on code-generation tasks, followed by testing.

    “Two recent literature reviews [36, 54] find the majority of research has focused on code-generation tasks, followed by testing.”

No citation lists for this paper

No citation lists for this paper yet — checked again daily.

Cited by 114

Authors
Hou, X., Zhao, Y., Liu, Y., Yang, Z., Wang, K., Li, L., Luo, X., Lo, D., Grundy, J., & Wang, H.
Affiliations
  • Monash University (AU)
  • Beihang University (CN)
  • Huazhong University of Science and Technology (CN)
Venue
arXiv
Publisher
arXiv
Published
2023
ISSN
2331-8422 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4386081573
Cited by
114
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 13 · 2025: 43 · 2024: 52 · 2023: 6
FWCI
4.73
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • Singapore Management University Institutional Knowledge (InK) (Singapore Management University) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • arXiv (Cornell University)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Software Engineering Research
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Software Engineering Techniques and Practices
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Topic Modeling
Keywords
large language models, software engineering tasks, LLM evaluation

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