Suyoung Bae Sung Kyun Kwan University, CheolWon Na Sungkyunkwan University, Jaehoon Lee Sung Kyun Kwan University, Yumin Lee Sung Kyun Kwan University, YunSeok Choi SungKyunKwan University, Jee-Hyong Lee Sungkyunkwan University
As Large Language Models (LLMs) have become capable of generating long and descriptive code summaries, accurate and reliable evaluation of factual consistency has become a critical challenge. However, previous evaluation methods are primarily designed for short summaries of isolated code snippets. Consequently, they struggle to provide fine-grained evaluation of multi-sentence functionalities and fail to accurately assess dependency context commonly found in real-world code summaries.To address this, we propose ReFEree, a reference-free and fine-grained method for evaluating factual consistency in real-world code summaries. We define factual inconsistency criteria specific to code summaries and evaluate them at the segment level using these criteria along with dependency information. These segment-level results are then aggregated into a fine-grained score. We construct a code summarization benchmark with human-annotated factual consistency labels. The evaluation results demonstrate that ReFEree achieves the highest correlation with human judgment among 13 baselines, improving 15-18% over the previous state-of-the-art. Our code and data are available at https://github.com/bsy99615/ReFEree.git.
尚无 AI 解读，展示原文摘要
cs.CL
Proceedings of the 64th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (Volume 1: Long Papers) · 2026 · 正式发表
Gemini Team, Petko Georgiev, Ving Ian Lei, Ryan Burnell, Libin Bai, Anmol Gulati, Garrett Tanzer, Damien Vincent 等 1137 位作者
In this report, we introduce the Gemini 1.5 family of models, representing the next generation of highly compute-efficient multimodal models capable of recalling and reasoning over fine-grained information from millions of tokens of context, including multiple long documents and hours of video and audio. The family includes two new models: (1) an updated Gemini 1.5 Pro, which exceeds the February version on the great majority of capabilities and benchmarks; (2) Gemini 1.5 Flash, a more lightweight variant designed for efficiency with minimal regression in quality. Gemini 1.5 models achieve near-perfect recall on long-context retrieval tasks across modalities, improve the state-of-the-art in long-document QA, long-video QA and long-context ASR, and match or surpass Gemini 1.0 Ultra's state-of-the-art performance across a broad set of benchmarks. Studying the limits of Gemini 1.5's long-context ability, we find continued improvement in next-token prediction and near-perfect retrieval (>99%) up to at least 10M tokens, a generational leap over existing models such as Claude 3.0 (200k) and GPT-4 Turbo (128k). Finally, we highlight real-world use cases, such as Gemini 1.5 collaborating with professionals on completing their tasks achieving 26 to 75% time savings across 10 different job categories, as well as surprising new capabilities of large language models at the frontier; when given a grammar manual for Kalamang, a language with fewer than 200 speakers worldwide, the model learns to translate English to Kalamang at a similar level to a person who learned from the same content.
Charlie Snell, Jaehoon Lee, Kelvin Xu, Aviral Kumar
Enabling LLMs to improve their outputs by using more test-time computation is a critical step towards building generally self-improving agents that can operate on open-ended natural language. In this paper, we study the scaling of inference-time computation in LLMs, with a focus on answering the question: if an LLM is allowed to use a fixed but non-trivial amount of inference-time compute, how much can it improve its performance on a challenging prompt? Answering this question has implications not only on the achievable performance of LLMs, but also on the future of LLM pretraining and how one should tradeoff inference-time and pre-training compute. Despite its importance, little research attempted to understand the scaling behaviors of various test-time inference methods. Moreover, current work largely provides negative results for a number of these strategies. In this work, we analyze two primary mechanisms to scale test-time computation: (1) searching against dense, process-based verifier reward models; and (2) updating the model's distribution over a response adaptively, given the prompt at test time. We find that in both cases, the effectiveness of different approaches to scaling test-time compute critically varies depending on the difficulty of the prompt. This observation motivates applying a "compute-optimal" scaling strategy, which acts to most effectively allocate test-time compute adaptively per prompt. Using this compute-optimal strategy, we can improve the efficiency of test-time compute scaling by more than 4x compared to a best-of-N baseline. Additionally, in a FLOPs-matched evaluation, we find that on problems where a smaller base model attains somewhat non-trivial success rates, test-time compute can be used to outperform a 14x larger model.