Papers › Fixing Large Language Models' Specification Misunderstanding for Better Code Generation
Fixing Large Language Models' Specification Misunderstanding for Better Code Generation
Zhao Tian, Junjie Chen, Xiangyu Zhang
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.
Code generation is to automatically generate source code conforming to a given programming specification, which has received extensive attention especially with the development of large language models (LLMs). Due to the inherent difficulty of code generation, the code generated by LLMs may not be aligned with the specification. Although thought-eliciting prompting techniques have been proposed to enhance the code generation performance of LLMs, producing correct understanding for complicated programming problems remains challenging, resulting in unsatisfactory performance. Also, some feedback-based prompting techniques have been proposed to fix incorrect code using error messages produced by test execution. However, when the generated code deviates significantly from the ground truth, they encounter difficulties in improving performance based on such coarse-grained information. In this work, we propose a novel prompting technique, called {\mu}FiX, to improve the code generation performance of LLMs by devising both sophisticated thought-eliciting prompting and feedback-based prompting and making the first exploration on their synergy. It first exploits test case analysis to obtain specification understanding and enables a self-improvement process to identify and refine the misunderstanding in the thought-eliciting prompting phase. {\mu}FiX further fixes the specification understanding towards the direction reducing the gap between the provided understanding (from the first phase) and the actual understanding implicitly utilized by LLMs for code generation in the feedback-based prompting phase. By improving the understanding with {\mu}FiX, the code generation performance of LLMs can be largely improved. Our evaluation on two advanced LLMs (ChatGPT and DeepSeek-Coder) with six widely-used benchmarks by comparing with 15 baselines, demonstrates the effectiveness of {\mu}FiX ...
In Syntology Open this paper in Syntology's Atlas, the map of the papers in Syntology's graph and their citations.
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