Papers › Automated Refactoring of Non-Idiomatic Python Code: A Differentiated Replication with LLMs
Automated Refactoring of Non-Idiomatic Python Code: A Differentiated Replication with LLMs
Alessandro Midolo, Massimiliano Di Penta
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.
In the Python ecosystem, the adoption of idiomatic constructs has been fostered because of their expressiveness, increasing productivity and even efficiency, despite controversial arguments concerning familiarity or understandability issues. Recent research contributions have proposed approaches -- based on static code analysis and transformation -- to automatically identify and enact refactoring opportunities of non-idiomatic code into idiomatic ones. Given the potential recently offered by Large Language Models (LLMs) for code-related tasks, in this paper, we present the results of a replication study in which we investigate GPT-4 effectiveness in recommending and suggesting idiomatic refactoring actions. Our results reveal that GPT-4 not only identifies idiomatic constructs effectively but frequently exceeds the benchmark in proposing refactoring actions where the existing baseline failed. A manual analysis of a random sample shows the correctness of the obtained recommendations. Our findings underscore the potential of LLMs to achieve tasks where, in the past, implementing recommenders based on complex code analyses was required.
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