Lakshya A Agrawal (@LakshyAAAgrawal) on X

1 min read Original article ↗

Post

Post

  • user avatar

    Example where text-davinci-003 and SantaCoder generate wrong identifiers, but SantaCoder with monitor-guided decoding generates correct identifiers.

    user avatar

    Guiding Language Models of Code with Global Context using Monitors paper page: huggingface.co/papers/2306.10… Language models of code (LMs) work well when the surrounding code in the vicinity of generation provides sufficient context. This is not true when it becomes necessary to use

  • user avatar

    MGD consistently improves compilation rate and ground truth match across LM sizes. Interestingly, smaller LMs with MGD can surpass larger LMs: SantaCoder-1.1B achieves better compilation rate and next-identifier match than the much larger text-davinci-003📈

    Summary of results with a budget of 6 generations per model: The numbers in parentheses are relative improvements of the "-MGD" configuration over the respective base model. 
SantaCoder-1.1B with MGD obtains 16.9% relatively better compilation rate than text-davinci-003, and 22.67% better than SantaCoder-1.1B.

    user avatar

    MGD complements existing code generation techniques, such as retrieval-augmented, static analysis-based prompting, architecture changes, and fill-in-the-middle decoding (see sections 4.2 & 4.3). Plus, no LM fine-tuning is required!🌟

    user avatar

    To evaluate MGD, We curate two datasets: PragmaticCode: Real-world open-source projects, complete with development environments & dependencies. DotPrompts: Method-level completion tasks, derived from prompts in PragmaticCode📊 Code & dataset at: aka.ms/monitors4codeg…

    user avatar

Don't miss what's happening

People on X are the first to know.