Papers › Evaluating Large Language Models Trained on Code
Evaluating Large Language Models Trained on Code
Mark Chen, Jerry Tworek, Heewoo Jun, Qiming Yuan, Henrique Ponde de Oliveira Pinto, Jared Kaplan, Harri Edwards, Yuri Burda, Nicholas Joseph, Greg Brockman, Alex Ray, Raul Puri, Gretchen Krueger, Michael Petrov, Heidy Khlaaf, Girish Sastry, Pamela Mishkin, Brooke Chan, Scott Gray, Nick Ryder, Mikhail Pavlov, Alethea Power, Lukasz Kaiser, Mohammad Bavarian, Clemens Winter, Philippe Tillet, Felipe Petroski Such, Dave Cummings, Matthias Plappert, Fotios Chantzis, Elizabeth Barnes, Ariel Herbert-Voss, William Hebgen Guss, Alex Nichol, Alex Paino, Nikolas Tezak, Jie Tang, Igor Babuschkin, Suchir Balaji, Shantanu Jain, William Saunders, Christopher Hesse, Andrew N. Carr, Jan Leike, Josh Achiam, Vedant Misra, Evan Morikawa, Alec Radford, Matthew Knight, Miles Brundage, Mira Murati, Katie Mayer, Peter Welinder, Bob McGrew, Dario Amodei, Sam McCandlish, Ilya Sutskever, Wojciech Zaremba
We introduce Codex, a GPT language model fine-tuned on publicly available code from GitHub, and study its Python code-writing capabilities. A distinct production version of Codex powers GitHub Copilot. On HumanEval, a new evaluation set we release to measure functional correctness for synthesizing programs from docstrings, our model solves 28.8% of the problems, while GPT-3 solves 0% and GPT-J solves 11.4%. Furthermore, we find that repeated sampling from the model is a surprisingly effective strategy for producing working solutions to difficult prompts. Using this method, we solve 70.2% of our problems with 100 samples per problem. Careful investigation of our model reveals its limitations, including difficulty with docstrings describing long chains of operations and with binding operations to variables. Finally, we discuss the potential broader impacts of deploying powerful code generation technologies, covering safety, security, and economics.
In Syntology Open this paper in Syntology's Atlas, the map of the papers in Syntology's graph and their citations.
For agents, Syntology's MCP tool lists every function and class Syntology harvested from this paper and whether it ran (how to connect): get_harvested_code_for_paper(arxiv_id="2107.03374")
Code
Syntology Ran 6 of 39 code samples harvested from 6 repositories linked to this paper; 33 have no recorded run. Of those that ran: 1 ran · honoured contract; 2 ran · our draft was wrong; 3 ran with no contract checked.
By repository: official repository: 5 samples from 1 repository, 2 ran; community (archive-listed): 22 samples from 4 repositories, 4 ran; found in paper text by Syntology: 12 samples from 1 repository, 0 ran. The run record, sample by sample. “Ran” means executed on a synthesized input, not that the code is correct or reproduces the paper.
13 repositories listed; official and paper-mentioned ones first.
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
39 samples harvested; 6 ran; 1 honoured the contract we drafted; 33 have no recorded run. Read from Syntology's graph 2026-09-24; that is when this build read the record, not when the samples ran.
Licence: 2 of the 39 samples are pointer only, meaning Syntology does not serve that copy's text. This page shows no code text for any sample; each one links to its file in the repository.
Harvested from 6 repositories linked to this paper, official or community; each sample names its own and says which. “Ran” means the sample executed on a synthesized input. It does not mean the output is correct, and nothing here reproduces the paper's results. “Honoured” and “violated” refer to a contract Syntology drafted from the code itself; “our draft was wrong” and “fixture could not drive it” are failures of Syntology's instrument, not of the code.
Each sample ends with its code_sha256, Syntology's identity for that exact code. An agent fetches the stored sample with Syntology's MCP tool get_code(code_sha256="…") (how to connect); click an identity to copy that call.
Repository labels, per sample. official repository: The archive marks this repository official for the paper. named in the paper: The archive records that the paper mentions this repository; it is not marked official. community (archive-listed): In the archive's code links for this paper, not marked official and not recorded as mentioned in the paper. found in paper text by Syntology: Syntology found this repository in the paper's own text; whether it is the authors' implementation is not asserted. community: Not in the archive's code links for this paper; a community repository Syntology harvested. Samples from a repository marked official are listed first. Licence labels name the repository's licence as recorded at harvest. “Pointer only” means Syntology does not serve that copy's text, for one of four reasons: no licence file was found; the licence was not identified; the licence is recorded as permissive but that copy's record is not marked cleared; or the licence is outside the permissive list Syntology serves text under (MIT, Apache-2.0, BSD and similar). Some licences outside that list permit redistribution, such as WTFPL, and GPL-3.0 under its conditions; they are simply not on the list. Hover a licence label for the reason. File links open the file on GitHub at the default branch, which may have changed since the harvest.
4ed7a6255ffcd3e2 · report
1214e44aeb74f364 · report
87135198de7ec14b · report
53e4784adcaf6602 · report
3c91bdab594f03c5 · report
e080db2eaa81fdb3 · report
f05983c38acfa250 · report
2a310ceef0a63386 · report
27f23c533d62061a · report
5bcc0e96c2ae8311 · report
73c40ea3df62ea10 · report
32636ddfa64b46bc · report
ed8331339b4de97c · report
0c83bb0f43b8dc57 · report
8bbb265e59e23293 · report
257503e1cf9966ff · report
8339ab6beb446371 · report
d3d6eed5a7c21746 · report
b6404d68982b4e0b · report
aa03c033d83047b0 · report
de45bd615801ae81 · report
f7666066f684b48f · report
4d5e8113a82b291c · report
d27e3a9c64e09294 · report
5263f985bd2e84c0 · report
2e22b41539e9cf87 · report
8d76e5a80e6c961c · report
9f6bcf31e58add54 · report
2cc1153eb2697bbf · report
5e866b54fbf03be3 · report
1a25d7256e5f4bb5 · report
c3efafd6833cfa4b · report
db66d9a5e3e1895b · report
92fc2114d3e87e85 · report
2ef1476740b6e3dd · report
f63bbaac0df6c6fe · report
d3bd061f24d302d4 · report
968da8e551331977 · report
63c649d1e83343f6 · report
Tasks
Datasets
Introduced by this paper, per the archive.
Results from the paper archive 2025-07-28
| Task | Dataset | Model | Metric | Value | Rank at snapshot | Leaderboard | Report |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Code Generation | APPS | Codex 12B (Raw) | Competition Pass@1 | 0.50% | #12 of 18 | Archive leaderboard | report |
| Code Generation | APPS | Codex 12B (Raw) | Competition Pass@1000 | 13.51% | #12 of 18 | Archive leaderboard | report |
| Code Generation | APPS | Codex 12B (Raw) | Competition Pass@5 | 1.00% | #12 of 18 | Archive leaderboard | report |
| Code Generation | APPS | Codex 12B (Raw) | Competition Pass@any | 13.51% | #12 of 18 | Archive leaderboard | report |
| Code Generation | APPS | Codex 12B (Raw) | Interview Pass@1 | 1.00% | #12 of 18 | Archive leaderboard | report |
| Code Generation | APPS | Codex 12B (Raw) | Interview Pass@1000 | 13.15% | #12 of 18 | Archive leaderboard | report |
| Code Generation | APPS | Codex 12B (Raw) | Interview Pass@5 | 1.73% | #12 of 18 | Archive leaderboard | report |
| Code Generation | APPS | Codex 12B (Raw) | Interview Pass@any | 13.15% | #12 of 18 | Archive leaderboard | report |
| Code Generation | APPS | Codex 12B (Raw) | Introductory Pass@1 | 5.60% | #12 of 18 | Archive leaderboard | report |
| Code Generation | APPS | Codex 12B (Raw) | Introductory Pass@1000 | 35.20% | #12 of 18 | Archive leaderboard | report |
| Code Generation | APPS | Codex 12B (Raw) | Introductory Pass@5 | 9.20% | #12 of 18 | Archive leaderboard | report |
| Code Generation | APPS | Codex 12B (Raw) | Introductory Pass@any | 35.20% | #12 of 18 | Archive leaderboard | report |
| Multi-task Language Understanding | BBH-alg | code-davinci-002 175B (CoT) | Average (%) | 73.9 | #1 of 7 | Archive leaderboard | report |
| Multi-task Language Understanding | BBH-nlp | code-davinci-002 175B (CoT) | Average (%) | 73.5 | #9 of 15 | Archive leaderboard | report |
Ranks are positions in the archive's leaderboards as they stood at the 2025-07-28 snapshot. Results published since then are not among these rows, so a rank here is not a current standing.
Methods
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