A Taxonomy of Programming Languages for Code Generation
Open accessAbstract
The world's 7,000+ languages vary widely in the availability of resources for NLP, motivating efforts to systematically categorize them by their degree of resourcefulness (Joshi et al., 2020). A similar disparity exists among programming languages (PLs); however, no resource-tier taxonomy has been established for code. As large language models (LLMs) grow increasingly capable of generating code, such a taxonomy becomes essential. To fill this gap, we present the first reproducible PL resource classification, grouping 646 languages into four tiers. We show that only 1.9% of languages (Tier 3, High) account for 74.6% of all tokens in seven major corpora, while 71.7% of languages (Tier 0, Scarce) contribute just 1.0%. Statistical analyses of within-tier inequality, dispersion, and distributional skew confirm that this imbalance is both extreme and systematic. Our results provide a principled framework for dataset curation and tier-aware evaluation of multilingual LLMs.
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.
No citation lists for this paper
No DOI on record — the citation lists can’t be looked up.
- Authors
- Raihan, N., Newman, C., & Zampieri, M.
- Venue
- arXiv
- Publisher
- arXiv
- Published
- 2026
- Pages
- 37-52
- arXiv
- 2604.00239
- OpenAlex
- W7148353399
- Cited by
- 0
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 0.00
- Type
- conference paper
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- arxiv.org
- Licence
- Locations
- Web as Corpus Workshop (WaC) (publishedVersion)
- arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
- arXiv (Cornell University) (cc-by-nc-nd)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Software Engineering Research
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Natural Language Processing Techniques
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Topic Modeling
- Keywords
- programming languages, code generation, large language models, multilingual LLMs, data curation
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
