Demonstration venue · read-only. Every page can be browsed; the buttons that would change it are switched off. Create an account to run TaxoReview on your own data. A simulation from public publication records: the people listed were not invited and did not agree to review.
? Tutorial for this page

Sicheng Zhong

dblp:276/6419 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
1ranked-venue papers
0as first author
1since 2021 · last 2024
—ORCID · none

Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several

Artificial intelligence and machine learning · 1 · 1 since 2021

Expertise — from the expertise taxonomy: the topics of the expert's papers under the CCF categories. A weight counts papers with recency: 1 for a paper about the topic, 0.3 when the topic is its context, halved every five years.

Software engineering, system software, and programming languages
1 paper
Debugging and program repair · 100%

Topics — the 2 heaviest of 2, each with the papers that count most for it

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Debugging and program repair › automated program repair
LLM-based program repair
0.812024
Code Repair with LLMs gives an Exploration-Exploitation Tradeoff · NeurIPS 2024
Debugging and program repair › automated program repair
test-based program repair
0.212024
Code Repair with LLMs gives an Exploration-Exploitation Tradeoff · NeurIPS 2024

Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics

thompson sampling · 0.8large language model · 0.8arm-acquiring bandits · 0.8
YearPublicationVenuePosition
2024 Code Repair with LLMs gives an Exploration-Exploitation Tradeoff
abstract
Iteratively improving and repairing source code with large language models (LLMs), known as refinement, has emerged as a popular way of generating programs that would be too complex to construct in one shot. Given a bank of test cases, together with a candidate program, an LLM can improve that program by being prompted with failed test cases. But it remains an open question how to best iteratively refine code, with prior work employing simple greedy or breadth-first strategies. We show here that refinement exposes an explore-exploit tradeoff: exploit by refining the program that passes the most test cases, or explore by refining a lesser considered program. We frame this as an arm-acquiring bandit problem, which we solve with Thompson Sampling. The resulting LLM-based program synthesis algorithm is broadly applicable: Across loop invariant synthesis, visual reasoning puzzles, and competition programming problems, we find that our new method can solve more problems using fewer language model calls.
Hao Tang 0008, Keya Hu, Sicheng Zhong, Wei-Long Zheng, Xujie Si, Kevin Ellis
NeurIPS4