These profiles are fed back to the LLM, which then revises the code to reduce overhead.

Program synthesis has been long studied with recent approaches focused on directly using the power of Large Language Models (LLMs) to generate code.

Code generation models have increasingly become integral to aiding software development.

Large language models (LLMs) have shown remarkable progress in code generation, but their generated code often suffers from inefficiency, resulting in longer execution times and higher memory consumption. To address this issue, we propose EffiLearner, a self-optimization framework that utilizes execution overhead profiles to improve the efficiency of LLM-generated code. EffiLearner first generates code using an LLM, then executes it locally to capture execution time and memory usage profiles. These profiles are fed back to the LLM, which then revises the code to reduce overhead. To evaluate the effectiveness of EffiLearner, we conduct extensive experiments on EffiBench and two commonly used code generation benchmarks with 16 open-source and 6 closed-source models. Our evaluation results demonstrate that through iterative self-optimization, EffiLearner significantly enhances the efficiency of LLM-generated code. For example, the execution time (ET) of StarCoder2-15B for the EffiBench decreases from 0.93 (s) to 0.12 (s) which reduces 87.1\% execution time requirement compared with the initial code. The total memory usage (TMU) of StarCoder2-15B also decreases from 22.02 (Mb s), which decreases 90.8\% total memory consumption during the execution process.

As modern science becomes increasingly data-intensive, the ability to analyze and visualize large-scale, complex datasets is critical to accelerating discovery. However, many domain scientists lack the programming expertise required to develop custom data analysis workflows, creating barriers to timely and effective insight. Large language models (LLMs) offer a promising solution by generating executable code from natural language descriptions. In this paper, we investigate the trustworthiness of open-source LLMs in autonomously producing Python scripts for scientific data analysis and visualization. We construct a benchmark suite of domain-inspired prompts that reflect real-world research tasks and systematically evaluate the executability and correctness of the generated code. Our findings show that, without human intervention, the reliability of LLM-generated code is limited, with frequent failures caused by ambiguous prompts and the models' insufficient understanding of domain-specific contexts. To address these challenges, we design and assess three complementary strategies: data-aware prompt disambiguation, retrieval-augmented prompt enhancement, and iterative error repair. While these methods significantly improve execution success rates and output quality, further refinement is needed. This work highlights both the promise and current limitations of LLM-driven automation in scientific workflows and introduces actionable techniques and a reusable benchmark for building more inclusive, accessible, and trustworthy AI-assisted research tools.

In the past few years LLMs have emerged as a tool that can aid programmers by taking natural language descriptions and generating code based on it. However, the reliability of LLM code generation and current validation techniques for it are far from strong enough to be used for mission-critical or safety-critical applications. In this work we explore ways to offer formal guarantees of correctness to LLM generated code; such guarantees could improve the quality of general AI Code Assistants and support their use for critical applications. To address this challenge we propose to incorporate a Formal Query Language that can represent a user's intent in a formally defined but natural language-like manner that a user can confirm matches their intent. We then have a formal specification of the user intent which we can use to verify that LLM-generated code matches the user's intent. We implement these ideas in our system, Astrogator, for the Ansible programming language, widely used for system administration, including for critical systems. The system includes an intuitive formal query language, a calculus for representing the behavior of Ansible programs, and a symbolic interpreter and a unification algorithm which together are used for the verification. A key innovation in Astrogator is the use of a Knowledge Base to capture system-specific implementation dependencies that greatly reduce the need for system knowledge in expressing formal queries. On a benchmark suite of 21 code-generation tasks, our verifier is able to verify correct code in 83% of cases and identify incorrect code in 92%.

In recent years, LLMs have been widely integrated into software engineering workflows, supporting tasks like code generation. However, while these models often generate functionally correct outputs, we still lack a systematic understanding and evaluation of their non-functional qualities. Existing studies focus mainly on whether generated code passes the tests rather than whether it passes with quality. Guided by the ISO/IEC 25010 quality model, this study conducted three complementary investigations: a systematic review of 108 papers, two industry workshops with practitioners from multiple organizations, and an empirical analysis of patching real-world software issues using three LLMs. Motivated by insights from both the literature and practitioners, the empirical study examined the quality of generated patches on security, maintainability, and performance efficiency. Across the literature, we found that security and performance efficiency dominate academic attention, while maintainability and other qualities are understudied. In contrast, industry experts prioritize maintainability and readability, warning that generated code may accelerate the accumulation of technical debt. In our evaluation of functionally correct patches generated by three LLMs, improvements in one quality dimension often come at the cost of others. Runtime and memory results further show high variance across models and optimization strategies. Overall, our findings reveal a mismatch between academic focus, industry priorities, and model performance, highlighting the urgent need to integrate quality assurance mechanisms into LLM code generation pipelines to ensure that future generated code not only passes tests but truly passes with quality.

These profiles are fed back to the LLM, which then revises the code to reduce overhead.

Program synthesis has been long studied with recent approaches focused on directly using the power of Large Language Models (LLMs) to generate code.