Skip to content
Book Open access

Evaluating and Improving the Quality of LLM-Generated Code

Jul 2026 · SIGSOFT FSE Companion · 0 citations · 4 references
Computer Science

TL;DR

This tutorial introduces a reusable, end-to-end evaluation pipeline grounded in empirical software engineering practices, focusing on post-generation validation rather than prompt design, allowing for validating AI-generated code in modern development workflows.

Abstract

Large Language Models (LLMs) are increasingly used to generate production code, yet systematic methods for evaluating their quality and security remain underdeveloped. This tutorial introduces a reusable, end-to-end evaluation pipeline grounded in empirical software engineering practices, focusing on post-generation validation rather than prompt design. Participants will apply static analysis tools to assess maintainability, reliability, and security, and compare results across models, prompts, and human-written baselines. The pipeline supports structured aggregation and interpretation of outputs, enabling reproducible and defensible assessments. Extensions include agentic remediation, explainability for trust calibration, and bias-aware evaluation. Attendees will leave with practical evaluation artifacts and a principled framework for validating AI-generated code in modern development workflows.

Read PDF

Similar papers

Open access Jul 2026

PROBE: Benchmarking code generation in large language models

The findings show that, while LLMs achieve promising results, they struggle with harder problems and with programming languages that have fewer available resources for training, and they often fail due to fundamental and easily avoidable errors that underscore the unreliability of automatically generated code.

Rodrigo Pato Nogueira, Marco Vieira, João R. Campos · 1 citation
Preprint Aug 2026

Unreliable in Practice? A Comprehensive Study of Errors in LLM-Generated Code

It is observed that generated code often omits basic input validation or memory-safety checks, which can lead to overflows, resource exhaustion, or other reliability/security issues, and even the largest models frequently make simple mistakes.

Rodrigo Pato Nogueira, Marco Vieira, João R. Campos · 0 citations
#software testing Preprint Aug 2026

Benchmarking the Titans: A Multi-Dimensional Empirical Evaluation of LLM Code Generation Quality in the .NET Ecosystem

An automated, multi-dimensional evaluation framework for C# code generation, applying it to four state-of-the-art LLMs: GPT, Gemini, Claude, and Grok is presented and a substantial gap between correctness and quality attributes is revealed.

Seyed Mohammad Mahdi Ghalandarian, Majid Bazargani, Masoumeh Taromirad · 0 citations
Open access Jul 2026

Can Language Models Generate Secure Terraform Code? A Security-Focused Benchmark Using Static Analysis

An empirical benchmark evaluating whether LLMs and SLMs can generate security-compliant AWS Terraform configurations suggests that prompt design is a critical factor, highlighting the need for a proper pipeline for developing and validating LLM-assisted secure IaC generation.

Francis Luis Santos Vargas, R. Mansilha, Diego Kreutz · 0 citations
Preprint Jul 2026

On the risk of coding before testing: An empirical study on LLM-based test generation workflow

This paper introduces and empirically study the phenomenon of error propagation, where faults in generated code are systematically replicated in associated test artifacts, and examines whether LLM-generated code biases the generation of subsequent tests.

Michael Konstantinou, Florian Tambon, Mike Papadakis · 1 citation
Preprint Aug 2026

RepoProbe: Benchmarking Architecture-Aware Repository Comprehension with Checklists

This work introduces RepoProbe, a novel benchmark for evaluating repository-level code understanding through open-ended Q&A using GitHub Discussions, which focuses on open-ended architectural inquiries rather than defect reporting and proposes a Checklist-Based Verification Protocol that decomposes answers into atomic,...

Yue Yang, Alyssa Wu, Ji Luo et al. · 1 citation

We use cookies to run the site and, with your consent, for analytics and to show ads. See our Cookie Policy.