Papers › Exploring and Unleashing the Power of Large Language Models in Automated Code Translation
Exploring and Unleashing the Power of Large Language Models in Automated Code Translation
Zhen Yang, Fang Liu, Zhongxing Yu, Jacky Wai Keung, Jia Li, Shuo Liu, Yifan Hong, Xiaoxue Ma, Zhi Jin, Ge Li
Code translation tools (transpilers) are developed for automatic source-to-source translation. Although learning-based transpilers have shown impressive enhancement against rule-based counterparts, owing to their task-specific pre-training on extensive monolingual corpora. Their current performance still remains unsatisfactory for practical deployment, and the associated training resources are also prohibitively expensive. LLMs pre-trained on huge amounts of human-written code/text have shown remarkable performance in many code intelligence tasks due to their powerful generality, even without task-specific training. Thus, LLMs can potentially circumvent the above limitations, but they have not been exhaustively explored yet. This paper investigates diverse LLMs and learning-based transpilers for automated code translation tasks, finding that: although certain LLMs have outperformed current transpilers, they still have some accuracy issues, where most of the failures are induced by a lack of comprehension of source programs, missing clear instructions on I/O types in translation, and ignoring discrepancies between source and target programs. Enlightened by the above findings, we further propose UniTrans, a Unified code Translation framework, applicable to various LLMs, for unleashing their power in this field. Specifically, UniTrans first crafts a series of test cases for target programs with the assistance of source programs. Next, it harnesses the above auto-generated test cases to augment the code translation and then evaluate their correctness via execution. Afterward, UniTrans further (iteratively) repairs incorrectly translated programs prompted by test case execution results. Extensive experiments are conducted on six settings of translation datasets between Python, Java, and C++. Three recent LLMs of diverse sizes are tested with UniTrans, and all achieve substantial improvements.
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="2404.14646")
Code
Syntology Ran 1 of 2 code samples harvested from 1 repository linked to this paper; 1 has no recorded run. Of those that ran: 1 ran · our draft was wrong.
By repository: official repository: 2 samples from 1 repository, 1 ran. The run record, sample by sample. “Ran” means executed on a synthesized input, not that the code is correct or reproduces the paper.
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
2 samples harvested; 1 ran; 0 honoured the contract we drafted; 1 has 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 2 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 yz1019117968/fse-24-unitrans. “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.
9553c3aea21a678c · report
aa23841fe3add613 · report
Tasks
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