跳到正文
研踪PaperTrail

YOUR RESEARCH, IN SIGHT

让下一篇重要论文,不再错过。

覆盖计算机全学科,以 AI 为快捷入口。关注方向、作者和关键词,把发现变成持续的研究积累。

采集已暂停
正在读取账号与研究记录…

全站更新概况

+0新增论文
+0其中 AI 相关
+0已有论文修订
+0新增 AI 导读

arXiv 最近完成扫描:等待完成 · 全站最近入库:2026-11-02 00:39各信源进度 →

统计口径与数据新鲜度

统计 2026-11-03 19:04 — 2026-11-04 19:04(北京时间) · 点击数字查看对应简报;AI 相关包含在新增论文内。

最近完成检查:尚未完成最近发现新增版本:2026-11-02 00:39库内论文最新更新时间:2026-10-30 01:59

每分钟刷新已保存的数据。空检查不代表采集异常;新收录可能包含历史论文。AI 导读按新增版本计数。

8,677 已收录论文7,675 AI 相关1,866 有修订112 HF 社区发现

浏览论文库

时间范围跟随排序:版本更新、本站收录或首次发表。最新收录可能包含历史论文。

找到 4 篇论文 · 按版本更新时间排序等待首次采集
版本更新 · v2arXiv:2505.13004

EffiBench-X: A Multi-Language Benchmark for Measuring Efficiency of LLM-Generated Code

Yuhao Qing, Boyu Zhu, Mingzhe Du, Zhijiang Guo, Terry Yue Zhuo, Qianru Zhang, Jie M. Zhang, Heming Cui 等 12 位作者

Existing code generation benchmarks primarily evaluate functional correctness, with limited focus on code efficiency and often restricted to a single language like Python. To address this gap, we introduce EffiBench-X, the first multi-language benchmark designed to measure the efficiency of LLM-generated code. EffiBench-X supports Python, C++, Java, JavaScript, Ruby, and Golang. It comprises competitive programming tasks with human-expert solutions as efficiency baselines. Evaluating state-of-the-art LLMs on EffiBench-X reveals that while models generate functionally correct code, they consistently underperform human experts in efficiency. Even the most efficient LLM-generated solutions (Qwen3-32B) achieve only around \textbf{62\%} of human efficiency on average, with significant language-specific variations. LLMs show better efficiency in Python, Ruby, and JavaScript than in Java, C++, and Golang. For instance, DeepSeek-R1's Python code is significantly more efficient than its Java code. These results highlight the critical need for research into LLM optimization techniques to improve code efficiency across diverse languages. The dataset and evaluation infrastructure are submitted and available at https://github.com/EffiBench/EffiBench-X.git and https://huggingface.co/datasets/EffiBench/effibench-x.

尚无 AI 解读,展示原文摘要

cs.CL
arXiv ↗PDF ↗
版本更新 · v2arXiv:2610.34239

Honesty Testing of LLMs and AI Agents: A Vision for Software Engineering

Ying Xiao, Xinjian Wu, Lukas Twist, Yaoqi Guo, Yepang Liu, Zhenpeng Chen, Jie M. Zhang

Human oversight of large language models (LLMs) and artificial intelligence (AI) agents increasingly depends on their reports. Claims that conflict with a system's own judgments can conceal failures, prevent timely intervention, and contribute to severe harm. Greater autonomy makes faithful reporting increasingly important for maintaining human control. In this vision paper, we propose honesty testing of LLMs and AI agents as a new research area in software engineering. Building on existing honesty evaluations, our goal is to make faithful reporting a software quality requirement that developers can specify, test, and maintain. We define honesty bugs as behavioural defects in which an LLM or AI agent, when required to communicate faithfully, makes an explicit claim that conflicts with its own judgment at the time of reporting. We present an initial framework covering LLM-level testing under controlled inputs and agent-level testing of complete systems. The framework connects these levels to testing workflows and oracle evidence. We identify research directions in benchmarks, model and harness analysis, oracle construction, and lifecycle testing to support effective oversight alongside task correctness.

尚无 AI 解读,展示原文摘要

cs.SE
arXiv ↗PDF ↗
新论文 · v1arXiv:2610.34573

Software Engineering for AI-Driven Science

Lukas Twist, Xinjian Wu, Jingzhi Gong, Shuyin Ouyang, Ying Xiao, Benedetta Donato, Yaoqi Guo, Zhenpeng Chen 等 11 位作者

AI has made significant contributions to scientific discovery. Autonomous agents can now independently analyse complex problems, design experiments, write and execute code, analyse findings, and derive scientific conclusions. Nevertheless, errors in AI-generated code, experimental procedures, or evidence interpretation can lead to invalid research conclusions, undermining the reliability and reproducibility of automated scientific discovery. In this vision paper, we propose Software Engineering for AI-Driven Science (SE4AI4Sci) as an emerging research area for addressing this challenge. As an organising framework, we introduce the Scientific Assurance Chain, connecting intent, experimental design, implementation, execution, evidence, and claim. Through six documented failures in recent AI-for-science systems, we show where this chain can break, where existing assurance mechanisms fall short, and what new research challenges follow. We also outline a research agenda for adapting and extending software engineering techniques across the chain.

尚无 AI 解读,展示原文摘要

cs.SE
arXiv ↗PDF ↗
首次观测 · 记录 #1ACL Anthology · ACL 2026:acl:2026.acl-long.140ACL Anthology · ACL 2026

TRACE: Evaluating Execution Efficiency of LLM-Based Code Translation

Zhihao Gong Peking University, Zeyu Sun Institute of Software Chinese Academy of Sciences, Dong Huang National University of Singapore, Qingyuan Liang, Jie M. Zhang, Dan Hao Peking University

While Large Language Models (LLMs) have substantially improved the functional correctness of code translation, the critical dimension of execution efficiency remains overlooked. We present Trace, the first benchmark to explicitly assess efficiency in LLM-translated code. Trace includes 1,000 efficiency-critical tasks across C++, Java, and Python, each augmented with stress tests that reveal efficiency disparities often overlooked by small-scale tests. Using Trace, we conduct an extensive evaluation of 28 representative LLMs and highlight several key insights: 1) Correctness and efficiency are often misaligned: the correctness leader Claude-Sonnet-4-Think achieves only moderate time efficiency, outperformed by smaller open-source LLMs such as Qwen2.5-Coder-14B-Instruct. 2) Inefficiency is both prevalent and patterned: 23.5% of correct translations suffer from notable inefficiency, mainly arising from algorithm implementation discrepancy (11.9%), language construct mismatch (66.4%), and resource management inefficiency (21.7%).3) Inference-time prompt strategies bring only modest improvements, indicating that simple prompting alone is insufficient to improve translation efficiency. Together, our results establish execution efficiency as an essential dimension of code translation and position Trace as a principled foundation for efficiency-oriented evaluation. Our code and data are available at: https://github.com/Albert-Gong/TRACE.

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

ACL Anthology · ACL 2026 ↗PDF ↗