Results of the summarizing process for the arXiv paper: 2304.05128v1

Large language models (LLMs) have shown impressive performance in code generation, but generating the correct solution for complex programming tasks can be challenging. To address this issue, prior works have designed program repair approaches to improve code generation performance. In this work, the authors propose a novel approach called Self-Debugging which teaches a large language model to debug its predicted program via few-shot demonstrations. The approach enables the model to perform rubber duck debugging without any feedback on code correctness or error messages. The model identifies its mistakes by explaining the generated code in natural language. The authors demonstrate that Self-Debugging achieves state-of-the-art performance on several code generation benchmarks including text-to-SQL generation, C++-to-Python translation and text-to-Python generation. On the Spider benchmark where there are no unit tests to verify prediction correctness, Self-Debugging with code explanation consistently improves the baseline by 2–3% and improves prediction accuracy on problems of the hardest label by 9%. On TransCoder and MBPP where unit tests are available, Self-Debugging improves baseline accuracy by up to 12%. By leveraging feedback messages and reusing failed predictions, Self Debugging notably improves sample efficiency and can match or outperform baseline models that generate more than 10x candidate programs. The authors highlight the promise of improving coding performance of large language models by teaching them to iteratively debug their own predictions instead of requiring them to generate correct code from scratch. SELF DEBUGGING instructs the model to understand the code identify errors and follow error messages to fix bugs. Future work includes improving the model's ability to conduct all these steps through better code explanation ability leading to better debugging performance. One direction is instructing models to describe high level semantic meaning of code along with implementation details in explanations while another is including additional debugging information in feedback such as potential bug descriptions. Preliminary results suggest that model generated feedback messages on semantic errors do not provide additional benefits on top of line–by–line code explanation and future work can explore techniques to predict more informative error messages.

• - Large language models (LLMs) have impressive performance in code generation, but generating correct solutions for complex programming tasks can be challenging.
• - Prior works have designed program repair approaches to improve code generation performance.
• - The authors propose a novel approach called Self-Debugging which teaches a large language model to debug its predicted program via few-shot demonstrations.
• - The approach enables the model to perform rubber duck debugging without any feedback on code correctness or error messages.
• - Self-Debugging achieves state-of-the-art performance on several code generation benchmarks including text-to-SQL generation, C++-to-Python translation and text-to-Python generation.
• - On the Spider benchmark where there are no unit tests to verify prediction correctness, Self-Debugging with code explanation consistently improves the baseline by 2–3% and improves prediction accuracy on problems of the hardest label by 9%.
• - On TransCoder and MBPP where unit tests are available, Self-Debugging improves baseline accuracy by up to 12%.
• - By leveraging feedback messages and reusing failed predictions, Self Debugging notably improves sample efficiency and can match or outperform baseline models that generate more than 10x candidate programs.
• - Future work includes improving the model's ability to conduct all these steps through better code explanation ability leading to better debugging performance.

Large language models are really good at writing computer code, but sometimes it's hard for them to write the right code for difficult problems. People have made ways to help these models get better at writing code. The authors of this article made a new way called Self-Debugging that helps the model fix its own mistakes by watching someone else do it. This new way makes the model even better at writing code and can solve harder problems. In the future, they want to make the model even better at understanding how to fix mistakes in its own code. Definitions- Large language models: computer programs that can write human-like text or code - Code generation: creating computer programs using a machine learning model - Debugging: finding and fixing errors in computer programs - Few-shot demonstrations: showing a machine learning model how to do something with only a few examples - Rubber duck debugging: explaining your code to an inanimate object (like a rubber duck) to help you find errors

Self-Debugging: Teaching Large Language Models to Debug Their Own Predictions

Large language models (LLMs) have become increasingly popular for code generation tasks, but generating the correct solution for complex programming tasks can be challenging. To address this issue, prior works have designed program repair approaches to improve code generation performance. In this work, the authors propose a novel approach called Self-Debugging which teaches a large language model to debug its predicted program via few-shot demonstrations.

Overview of Self-Debugging

The Self-Debugging approach enables the model to perform rubber duck debugging without any feedback on code correctness or error messages. The model identifies its mistakes by explaining the generated code in natural language. This allows it to understand and identify errors in its own predictions and follow error messages to fix bugs. The authors demonstrate that Self-Debugging achieves state-of-the-art performance on several code generation benchmarks including text-to-SQL generation, C++-to Python translation and text–to–Python generation. On the Spider benchmark where there are no unit tests to verify prediction correctness, Self–Debugging with code explanation consistently improves the baseline by 2–3% and improves prediction accuracy on problems of the hardest label by 9%. On TransCoder and MBPP where unit tests are available, Self–Debugging improves baseline accuracy by up to 12%. By leveraging feedback messages and reusing failed predictions, Self Debugging notably improves sample efficiency and can match or outperform baseline models that generate more than 10x candidate programs.

Promise of Improving Coding Performance

The authors highlight the promise of improving coding performance of large language models by teaching them to iteratively debug their own predictions instead of requiring them to generate correct code from scratch. Future work includes improving the model's ability to conduct all these steps through better code explanation ability leading to better debugging performance. One direction is instructing models to describe high level semantic meaning of code along with implementation details in explanations while another is including additional debugging information in feedback such as potential bug descriptions. Preliminary results suggest that model generated feedback messages on semantic errors do not provide additional benefits on top of line–by–line code explanation and future work can explore techniques to predict more informative error messages .

Conclusion

In conclusion, this research paper demonstrates how LLMs can be taught self debugging skills using few shot demonstrations which leads improved coding performance over existing methods for various types of programming tasks such as text –to –SQL generation , C++ -to -Python translation etc . The paper also highlights potential areas for improvement such as providing higher level semantic meaning along with implementation details in explanations , predicting more informative error messages etc .