A Comparison of Large Language Models and Genetic Programming for Program Synthesis

IF 11.7 1区 计算机科学 Q1 COMPUTER SCIENCE, ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE IEEE Transactions on Evolutionary Computation Pub Date : 2024-06-06 DOI:10.1109/TEVC.2024.3410873
Dominik Sobania;Justyna Petke;Martin Briesch;Franz Rothlauf
{"title":"A Comparison of Large Language Models and Genetic Programming for Program Synthesis","authors":"Dominik Sobania;Justyna Petke;Martin Briesch;Franz Rothlauf","doi":"10.1109/TEVC.2024.3410873","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Large language models have recently become known for their ability to generate computer programs, especially through tools, such as GitHub Copilot, a domain where genetic programming (GP) has been very successful so far. Although they require different inputs (free-text versus input/output examples) their goal is the same—program synthesis. Therefore, in this work, we compare how well GitHub Copilot and GP perform on common program synthesis benchmark problems. We study the structure and diversity of the generated programs by using well-known software metrics. We find that GitHub Copilot and GP solve a similar number of benchmark problems (85.2% versus 77.8%, respectively). We find that GitHub Copilot generated smaller and less complex programs as GP, while GP is able to find new and unique problem solving strategies. This increase in diversity of solutions comes at a cost. When analyzing the success rates for 100 runs per problem, GitHub Copilot outperforms GP on over 50% of the problems.","PeriodicalId":13206,"journal":{"name":"IEEE Transactions on Evolutionary Computation","volume":"29 4","pages":"1434-1448"},"PeriodicalIF":11.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"IEEE Transactions on Evolutionary Computation","FirstCategoryId":"94","ListUrlMain":"https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/10551744/","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"计算机科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"COMPUTER SCIENCE, ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Large language models have recently become known for their ability to generate computer programs, especially through tools, such as GitHub Copilot, a domain where genetic programming (GP) has been very successful so far. Although they require different inputs (free-text versus input/output examples) their goal is the same—program synthesis. Therefore, in this work, we compare how well GitHub Copilot and GP perform on common program synthesis benchmark problems. We study the structure and diversity of the generated programs by using well-known software metrics. We find that GitHub Copilot and GP solve a similar number of benchmark problems (85.2% versus 77.8%, respectively). We find that GitHub Copilot generated smaller and less complex programs as GP, while GP is able to find new and unique problem solving strategies. This increase in diversity of solutions comes at a cost. When analyzing the success rates for 100 runs per problem, GitHub Copilot outperforms GP on over 50% of the problems.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
用于程序合成的大型语言模型与遗传编程的比较
大型语言模型最近因其生成计算机程序的能力而闻名,特别是通过工具,如GitHub Copilot,遗传编程(GP)到目前为止已经非常成功。尽管它们需要不同的输入(自由文本与输入/输出示例),但它们的目标是相同的程序合成。因此,在这项工作中,我们比较了GitHub Copilot和GP在常见程序合成基准问题上的表现。我们通过使用知名的软件度量来研究生成程序的结构和多样性。我们发现,GitHub Copilot和GP解决的基准问题数量相似(分别为85.2%和77.8%)。我们发现GitHub Copilot生成的程序更小、更不复杂,而GP能够找到新的、独特的解决问题的策略。解决方案多样性的增加是有代价的。当分析每个问题100次运行的成功率时,GitHub Copilot在超过50%的问题上优于GP。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
IEEE Transactions on Evolutionary Computation
IEEE Transactions on Evolutionary Computation 工程技术-计算机:理论方法
CiteScore
21.90
自引率
9.80%
发文量
196
审稿时长
3.6 months
期刊介绍: The IEEE Transactions on Evolutionary Computation is published by the IEEE Computational Intelligence Society on behalf of 13 societies: Circuits and Systems; Computer; Control Systems; Engineering in Medicine and Biology; Industrial Electronics; Industry Applications; Lasers and Electro-Optics; Oceanic Engineering; Power Engineering; Robotics and Automation; Signal Processing; Social Implications of Technology; and Systems, Man, and Cybernetics. The journal publishes original papers in evolutionary computation and related areas such as nature-inspired algorithms, population-based methods, optimization, and hybrid systems. It welcomes both purely theoretical papers and application papers that provide general insights into these areas of computation.
期刊最新文献
Token-Level Constraint Boundary Search for Jailbreaking Text-to-Image Models Evolutionary Zero-Shot Proxy in Various Evaluation Scenarios: A Symbolic Learning Perspective Dynamic Grouping With a Self-Aware Computational Resource Allocation for Large-Scale Multi-Objective Optimization Leader–Follower Disagreement Minimization in Social Networks ENERGIZE: A Neuroevolution Framework for Energy-Efficient Machine Learning
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1