代码摘要模型是否会处理过多信息?函数签名可能就是全部所需

IF 6.6 2区 计算机科学 Q1 COMPUTER SCIENCE, SOFTWARE ENGINEERING ACM Transactions on Software Engineering and Methodology Pub Date : 2024-03-14 DOI:10.1145/3652156
Xi Ding, Rui Peng, Xiangping Chen, Yuan Huang, Jing Bian, Zibin Zheng
{"title":"代码摘要模型是否会处理过多信息?函数签名可能就是全部所需","authors":"Xi Ding, Rui Peng, Xiangping Chen, Yuan Huang, Jing Bian, Zibin Zheng","doi":"10.1145/3652156","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>With the fast development of large software projects, automatic code summarization techniques, which summarize the main functionalities of a piece of code using natural languages as comments, play essential roles in helping developers understand and maintain large software projects. Many research efforts have been devoted to building automatic code summarization approaches. Typical code summarization approaches are based on deep learning models. They transform the task into a sequence-to-sequence task, which inputs source code and outputs summarizations in natural languages. All code summarization models impose different input size limits, such as 50 to 10,000, for the input source code. However, how the input size limit affects the performance of code summarization models still remains under-explored. In this paper, we first conduct an empirical study to investigate the impacts of different input size limits on the quality of generated code comments. To our surprise, experiments on multiple models and datasets reveal that setting a low input size limit, such as 20, does not necessarily reduce the quality of generated comments. </p><p>Based on this finding, we further propose to use function signatures instead of full source code to summarize the main functionalities first and then input the function signatures into code summarization models. Experiments and statistical results show that inputs with signatures are, on average, more than 2 percentage points better than inputs without signatures and thus demonstrate the effectiveness of involving function signatures in code summarization. We also invite programmers to do a questionnaire to evaluate the quality of code summaries generated by two inputs with different truncation levels. The results show that function signatures generate, on average, 9.2% more high-quality comments than full code.</p>","PeriodicalId":50933,"journal":{"name":"ACM Transactions on Software Engineering and Methodology","volume":"2 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":6.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Do Code Summarization Models Process Too Much Information? Function Signature May Be All What Is Needed\",\"authors\":\"Xi Ding, Rui Peng, Xiangping Chen, Yuan Huang, Jing Bian, Zibin Zheng\",\"doi\":\"10.1145/3652156\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>With the fast development of large software projects, automatic code summarization techniques, which summarize the main functionalities of a piece of code using natural languages as comments, play essential roles in helping developers understand and maintain large software projects. Many research efforts have been devoted to building automatic code summarization approaches. Typical code summarization approaches are based on deep learning models. They transform the task into a sequence-to-sequence task, which inputs source code and outputs summarizations in natural languages. All code summarization models impose different input size limits, such as 50 to 10,000, for the input source code. However, how the input size limit affects the performance of code summarization models still remains under-explored. In this paper, we first conduct an empirical study to investigate the impacts of different input size limits on the quality of generated code comments. To our surprise, experiments on multiple models and datasets reveal that setting a low input size limit, such as 20, does not necessarily reduce the quality of generated comments. </p><p>Based on this finding, we further propose to use function signatures instead of full source code to summarize the main functionalities first and then input the function signatures into code summarization models. Experiments and statistical results show that inputs with signatures are, on average, more than 2 percentage points better than inputs without signatures and thus demonstrate the effectiveness of involving function signatures in code summarization. We also invite programmers to do a questionnaire to evaluate the quality of code summaries generated by two inputs with different truncation levels. The results show that function signatures generate, on average, 9.2% more high-quality comments than full code.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":50933,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"ACM Transactions on Software Engineering and Methodology\",\"volume\":\"2 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":6.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-03-14\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"ACM Transactions on Software Engineering and Methodology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"94\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1145/3652156\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"计算机科学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"COMPUTER SCIENCE, SOFTWARE ENGINEERING\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"ACM Transactions on Software Engineering and Methodology","FirstCategoryId":"94","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1145/3652156","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"计算机科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"COMPUTER SCIENCE, SOFTWARE ENGINEERING","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

随着大型软件项目的快速发展,使用自然语言作为注释总结代码主要功能的自动代码总结技术在帮助开发人员理解和维护大型软件项目方面发挥着至关重要的作用。许多研究工作都致力于构建自动代码总结方法。典型的代码总结方法基于深度学习模型。它们将任务转化为序列到序列的任务,输入源代码并输出自然语言摘要。所有代码摘要模型都对输入源代码的大小设置了不同的限制,如 50 到 10,000 不等。然而,输入大小限制如何影响代码摘要模型的性能仍未得到充分探讨。在本文中,我们首先进行了一项实证研究,探讨不同输入大小限制对生成代码注释质量的影响。出乎我们意料的是,在多个模型和数据集上进行的实验表明,设置较低的输入大小限制(如 20)并不一定会降低生成注释的质量。基于这一发现,我们进一步建议使用函数签名而不是完整的源代码来总结主要功能,然后将函数签名输入代码总结模型。实验和统计结果表明,有签名的输入比没有签名的输入平均要好 2 个百分点以上,从而证明了在代码摘要中使用函数签名的有效性。我们还邀请程序员进行问卷调查,以评估由两种截断程度不同的输入所生成的代码摘要的质量。结果显示,函数签名生成的高质量注释平均比完整代码多出 9.2%。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Do Code Summarization Models Process Too Much Information? Function Signature May Be All What Is Needed

With the fast development of large software projects, automatic code summarization techniques, which summarize the main functionalities of a piece of code using natural languages as comments, play essential roles in helping developers understand and maintain large software projects. Many research efforts have been devoted to building automatic code summarization approaches. Typical code summarization approaches are based on deep learning models. They transform the task into a sequence-to-sequence task, which inputs source code and outputs summarizations in natural languages. All code summarization models impose different input size limits, such as 50 to 10,000, for the input source code. However, how the input size limit affects the performance of code summarization models still remains under-explored. In this paper, we first conduct an empirical study to investigate the impacts of different input size limits on the quality of generated code comments. To our surprise, experiments on multiple models and datasets reveal that setting a low input size limit, such as 20, does not necessarily reduce the quality of generated comments.

Based on this finding, we further propose to use function signatures instead of full source code to summarize the main functionalities first and then input the function signatures into code summarization models. Experiments and statistical results show that inputs with signatures are, on average, more than 2 percentage points better than inputs without signatures and thus demonstrate the effectiveness of involving function signatures in code summarization. We also invite programmers to do a questionnaire to evaluate the quality of code summaries generated by two inputs with different truncation levels. The results show that function signatures generate, on average, 9.2% more high-quality comments than full code.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
ACM Transactions on Software Engineering and Methodology
ACM Transactions on Software Engineering and Methodology 工程技术-计算机:软件工程
CiteScore
6.30
自引率
4.50%
发文量
164
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: Designing and building a large, complex software system is a tremendous challenge. ACM Transactions on Software Engineering and Methodology (TOSEM) publishes papers on all aspects of that challenge: specification, design, development and maintenance. It covers tools and methodologies, languages, data structures, and algorithms. TOSEM also reports on successful efforts, noting practical lessons that can be scaled and transferred to other projects, and often looks at applications of innovative technologies. The tone is scholarly but readable; the content is worthy of study; the presentation is effective.
期刊最新文献
Effective, Platform-Independent GUI Testing via Image Embedding and Reinforcement Learning Bitmap-Based Security Monitoring for Deeply Embedded Systems Harmonising Contributions: Exploring Diversity in Software Engineering through CQA Mining on Stack Overflow An Empirical Study on the Characteristics of Database Access Bugs in Java Applications Self-planning Code Generation with Large Language Models
×
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:481959085
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