With the rapid development of code LLMs, many popular evaluation benchmarks, such as HumanEval, DS-1000, and MBPP, have emerged to measure the performance of code LLMs with a particular focus on code generation tasks. However, they are insufficient to cover the full range of expected capabilities of code LLMs, which span beyond code generation to answering diverse coding-related questions.

Large Language Models for code (code LLMs) have witnessed tremendous progress in recent years. With the rapid development of code LLMs, many popular evaluation benchmarks, such as HumanEval, DS-1000, and MBPP, have emerged to measure the performance of code LLMs with a particular focus on code generation tasks. However, they are insufficient to cover the full range of expected capabilities of code LLMs, which span beyond code generation to answering diverse coding-related questions. To fill this gap, we propose InfiBench, the first large-scale freeform question-answering (QA) benchmark for code to our knowledge, comprising 234 carefully selected high-quality Stack Overflow questions that span across 15 programming languages. InfiBench uses four types of model-free automatic metrics to evaluate response correctness where domain experts carefully concretize the criterion for each question. We conduct a systematic evaluation for over 100 latest code LLMs on InfiBench, leading to a series of novel and insightful findings.

Instruction tuning is a supervised fine-tuning approach that significantly improves the ability of large language models (LLMs) to follow human instructions. For programming tasks, most models are finetuned with costly human-annotated instruction-response pairs or those generated by large, proprietary LLMs, which may not be permitted. We propose SelfCodeAlign, the first fully transparent and permissive pipeline for self-aligning code LLMs without extensive human annotations or distillation. SelfCodeAlign employs the same base model for inference throughout the data generation process. It first extracts diverse coding concepts from high-quality seed snippets to generate new tasks.

Code Large Language Models (Code LLMs) have excelled at tasks like code completion but often miss deeper semantics such as execution effects and dynamic states. This paper aims to bridge the gap between Code LLMs' reliance on static text data and the need for semantic understanding for complex tasks like debugging and program repair. We introduce a novel strategy,, to train Code LLMs to reason comprehensive semantics, encompassing high-level functional descriptions, local execution effects of individual statements, and overall input/output behavior, thereby linking static code text with dynamic execution states.We begin by collecting PyX, a clean Python corpus of fully executable code samples with functional descriptions and test cases. We propose training Code LLMs not only to write code but also to understand code semantics by reasoning about key properties, constraints, and execution behaviors using natural language, mimicking human verbal debugging, i.e., rubber-duck debugging. This approach led to the development of SemCoder, a Code LLM with only 6.7B parameters, which shows competitive performance with GPT-3.5-turbo on code generation and execution reasoning tasks.

Amidst the recent strides in evaluating Large Language Models for Code (Code LLMs), existing benchmarks have mainly focused on the functional correctness of generated code, neglecting the importance of their computational efficiency. To fill the gap, we present Mercury, the first code efficiency benchmark for Code LLMs. It comprises 1,889 Python tasks, each accompanied by adequate solutions that serve as real-world efficiency baselines, enabling a comprehensive analysis of the runtime distribution. Based on the distribution, we introduce a new metric Beyond, which computes a runtime-percentile-weighted Pass score to reflect functional correctness and code efficiency simultaneously. On Mercury, leading Code LLMs can achieve 65% on Pass, while less than 50% on Beyond. Given that an ideal Beyond score would be aligned with the Pass score, it indicates that while Code LLMs exhibit impressive capabilities in generating functionally correct code, there remains a notable gap in their efficiency. Finally, our empirical experiments reveal that Direct Preference Optimization (DPO) serves as a robust baseline for enhancing code efficiency compared with Supervised Fine Tuning (SFT), which paves a promising avenue for future exploration of efficient code generation. Our code and data are available on GitHub: https://github.com/Elfsong/Mercury.

Open-source Large Language Models (LLMs) and their specialized variants, particularly Code LLMs, have recently delivered impressive performance. However, previous Code LLMs are typically fine-tuned on single-source data with limited quality and diversity, which may insufficiently elicit the potential of pre-trained Code LLMs.

As AI-based code generation becomes widespread, researchers are investigating the calibration of code LLMs - ensuring their confidence scores faithfully represent the true likelihood of code correctness. To do so, we investigate multicalibration, which can capture additional factors about a coding problem, such as complexity, code length, or programming language used. We study four multicalibration approaches on three function synthesis benchmarks, using latest-generation code LLMs (Qwen3 Coder, GPT-OSS, DeepSeek-R1-Distill). Our results demonstrate that multicalibration can yield distinct improvements over both uncalibrated token likelihoods (+1.03 in skill score) and baseline calibrations (+0.37 in skill score). We study the influence of the aforementioned factors in ablations, and make our dataset (consisting of code generations, likelihoods, and correctness labels) available for future research on code LLM calibration.

Abstract--Membership inference attacks (MIAs) on code completion models offer an effective way to assess privacy risks by inferring whether a given code snippet was part of the training data. Existing black-and gray-box MIAs rely on expensive surrogate models or manually crafted heuristic rules, which limit their ability to capture the nuanced memorization patterns exhibited by over-parameterized code language models. T o address these challenges, we propose AdvPrompt-MIA, a method specifically designed for code completion models, combining code-specific adversarial perturbations with deep learning. The core novelty of our method lies in designing a series of adversarial prompts that induce variations in the victim code model's output. By comparing these outputs with the ground-truth completion, we construct feature vectors to train a classifier that automatically distinguishes member from non-member samples. This design allows our method to capture richer memorization patterns and accurately infer training set membership. We conduct comprehensive evaluations on widely adopted models, such as Code Llama 7B, over the APPS and HumanEval benchmarks. The results show that our approach consistently outperforms state-of-the-art baselines, with AUC gains of up to 102%. In addition, our method exhibits strong transferability across different models and datasets, underscoring its practical utility and generalizability. Large language models (LLMs) have shown remarkable success in natural language processing by learning complex semantic and syntactic patterns from large-scale text corpora [1], [2]. This success has extended to the domain of source code, where code-specific LLMs (code LLMs) trained on billions of lines of code [3] now support tasks such as code completion [4], code summarization [5], [6], and vulnerability detection [7], and are integrated into tools like GitHub Copilot [8] and A WS CodeWhisperer [9]. Despite their impressive capabilities, code LLMs remain vulnerable to a variety of security and privacy threats, including adversarial perturbations [10], data poisoning [11], [12], and privacy leakage [13]-[15]. Among these, privacy leakage is particularly concerning due to its implications for sensitive information exposure and potential legal violations, often stemming from the memorization behavior of code LLMs [16]-[18].

Code Large Language Models (LLMs) are revolutionizing software engineering. However, scaling laws that guide the efficient training are predominantly analyzed on Natural Language (NL). Given the fundamental differences like strict syntax between code and NL, it is unclear whether these laws are directly applicable to code. To address this gap, we conduct the first large-scale empirical study of scaling laws for code, comprising 117 experimental runs with model sizes from 0.2B to 3.8B and training tokens from 2B to 128B. We fit the Chinchilla law and the Farsser law. First, the results show that the more expressive Farseer law offers greater accuracy. Second, the analysis reveals that Code LLMs scale effectively with model size. Crucially, code represents a more data-hungry regime, requiring a substantially higher data-to-parameter ratio than NL. Finally, two additional sets of experiments on code-NL mixtures show that NL benefits resource-constrained scenarios, but becomes a detriment at higher compute budgets.