Papers › Dialogue Management for Interactive API Search
Dialogue Management for Interactive API Search
Zachary Eberhart, Collin McMillan
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.
API search involves finding components in an API that are relevant to a programming task. For example, a programmer may need a function in a C library that opens a new network connection, then another function that sends data across that connection. Unfortunately, programmers often have trouble finding the API components that they need. A strong scientific consensus is emerging towards developing interactive tool support that responds to conversational feedback, emulating the experience of asking a fellow human programmer for help. A major barrier to creating these interactive tools is implementing dialogue management for API search. Dialogue management involves determining how a system should respond to user input, such as whether to ask a clarification question or to display potential results. In this paper, we present a dialogue manager for interactive API search that considers search results and dialogue history to select efficient actions. We implement two dialogue policies: a hand-crafted policy and a policy optimized via reinforcement learning. We perform a synthetics evaluation and a human evaluation comparing the policies to a generic single-turn, top-N policy used by source code search engines.
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