Papers › A Comprehensive Evaluation of Parameter-Efficient Fine-Tuning on Code Smell Detection
A Comprehensive Evaluation of Parameter-Efficient Fine-Tuning on Code Smell Detection
Beiqi Zhang, Peng Liang, Xin Zhou, Xiyu Zhou, David Lo, Qiong Feng, Zengyang Li, Lin Li
The archive published only this paper's code-link row. Authors, date and abstract are from arXiv's metadata (CC0), read from the Kaggle arXiv metadata snapshot of 2026-09-12 where its title matched the archive's; the title is the archive's.
Automated code smell detection faces persistent challenges due to the subjectivity of heuristic rules and the limited performance of traditional ML/DL models. While Large Language Models (LLMs) offer a promising alternative, their adoption is impeded by high fine-tuning costs and a lack of "LM-ready" benchmarks. To bridge these gaps, we present a study with two synergistic contributions. First, we constructed a high-quality benchmark for Complex Conditional, Complex Method, Feature Envy, and Data Class, validated through a rigorous two-stage manual review. Second, leveraging this benchmark, we systematically evaluated four Parameter-Efficient Fine-Tuning (PEFT) methods across nine LMs of varying parameter sizes. Their performance is compared against a comprehensive suite of baselines, including heuristics-based detectors, Deep Learning (DL)-based approaches, and state-of-the-art general-purpose LLMs under multiple In-Context Learning (ICL) settings. Our results demonstrate that PEFT methods achieve effectiveness comparable to or surpassing full fine-tuning while substantially reducing peak GPU memory usage for code smell detection. Furthermore, PEFT-tuned LMs consistently outperform all baselines, yielding MCC improvements ranging from 0.33% to 13.69%, with particularly notable gains for specific smell categories. These findings highlight PEFT techniques as effective and scalable solutions for advancing code smell detection.
Code
Repository list and official/mentioned flags are the archive's, frozen 2025-07-28. Reachability, where shown, is from one Syntology probe window (2026-09-16 to 2026-09-18); repositories not probed show nothing. GitHub stars are not tracked.
Code Syntology ran Syntology
Not run by Syntology. Nothing on this page verifies that the listed code works.
Results from the paper archive 2025-07-28
No leaderboard rows for this paper in the archive.
Report a problem or propose a change · a person checks every report against the paper or source before anything changes; decisions are listed on /corrections