AICD Bench: A Challenging Benchmark for AI-Generated Code Detection (2026.eacl-long)
Copied to clipboard
| Challenge: | Existing benchmarks for detecting AI-generated code are limited to binary human–machine classification under in-distribution settings. |
| Approach: | They propose to use AICD Bench to build a robust binary classification framework for large language models. |
| Outcome: | The proposed benchmark spans 2M examples, 77 models across 11 families, and 9 programming languages. |
Similar Papers
CoDet-M4: Detecting Machine-Generated Code in Multi-Lingual, Multi-Generator and Multi-Domain Settings (2025.findings-acl)
Copied to clipboard
| Challenge: | Large Language Models (LLMs) have revolutionized code generation but have significant consequences for programming skills, ethics, and assessment integrity. |
| Approach: | They propose a framework capable of distinguishing between human-written and LLM-generated program code across multiple programming languages, code generators, and domains. |
| Outcome: | The proposed framework distinguishes between human-written and LLM-generated program code across multiple programming languages, code generators, and domains. |
TURINGBENCH: A Benchmark Environment for Turing Test in the Age of Neural Text Generation (2021.findings-emnlp)
Copied to clipboard
| Challenge: | Recent advances in generative language models have enabled machines to generate realistic texts. |
| Approach: | They propose a benchmark environment to test the 'Turing Test' problem for neural text generation methods. |
| Outcome: | The proposed benchmark environment is based on 200K human- or machine-generated samples across 20 labels Human, GPT-1, GTP-2_small, GTT-2_medium, GPG-2_large, GGT-2_PyTorch, GGP-3, GROVER_base, griover_large and GRover_mega. |
CodeJudgeBench: Benchmarking LLM-as-a-Judge for Coding Tasks (2026.acl-long)
Copied to clipboard
| Challenge: | Large Language Models (LLMs) are increasingly used to judge code, but their reliability remains poorly understood. |
| Approach: | They propose a benchmark to evaluate Large Language Models as code judges . they find that small reasoning models outperform larger non-reasoning models . |
| Outcome: | The proposed benchmark evaluates LLM-as-a-Judge models across three coding tasks. |
A.S.E: A Repository-Level Benchmark for Evaluating Security in AI-Generated Code (2026.findings-acl)
Copied to clipboard
Keke Lian, Wang Bin, Lei Zhang, Libo Chen, Junjie Wang, Ziming Zhao, Yujiu Yang, Miaoqian Lin, Haotong Duan, Haoran Zhao, Shuang Liao, Mingda Guo, Quan Jiazheng, Yilu Zhong, Chenhao He, Chen Zichuan, Jie Wu, Haoling Li, Zhaoxuan Li, Jiongchi Yu, Hui LI, Dong Zhang
| Challenge: | Existing security evaluation benchmarks lack relevance to real-world AI programming tasks . current LLMs struggle with secure coding, research shows . |
| Approach: | They propose a repository-level evaluation benchmark to assess security of AI-generated code. |
| Outcome: | The proposed framework mirrors real-world AI programming tasks and offers valuable insights into the state of AI code generation. |
AssertionBench: A Benchmark to Evaluate Large-Language Models for Assertion Generation (2025.findings-naacl)
Copied to clipboard
| Challenge: | Assertions have been the de facto collateral for hardware for over a decade. |
| Approach: | They propose a benchmark to evaluate LLMs’ effectiveness for assertion generation quantitatively. |
| Outcome: | The proposed benchmark compares state-of-the-art LLMs with existing benchmarks and shows that they generate higher fractions of functionally correct assertions. |
PythonSaga: Redefining the Benchmark to Evaluate Code Generating LLMs (2024.findings-emnlp)
Copied to clipboard
| Challenge: | *HumanEval* and *MBPP* are two popular benchmarks for Python code generation. |
| Approach: | They propose a large-scale human evaluation of two popular Python benchmarks . they propose 185 hand-crafted prompts in a balanced representation of 38 programming concepts across diverse difficulty levels. |
| Outcome: | The proposed benchmarks show a critical bias towards a limited set of programming concepts, neglecting most of the other concepts entirely. |
AutoSUIT Bench - Automated Security UnIt Test Benchmark for LLM Coding (2026.findings-acl)
Copied to clipboard
Samuel Osebe, Fan Yang, Junyi Li, Yue Gu, Yongxin Wang, Satyapriya Krishna, Kai-Wei Chang, Aram Galstyan, Rahul Gupta, Weitong Ruan
| Challenge: | Large Language Models (LLMs) are evolving rapidly on code generation tasks. |
| Approach: | They propose to automate the vulnerability code benchmark creation with iterative auto validation. |
| Outcome: | The proposed benchmark covers 232 CWE categories across C/C++, Java, and Python languages. |
DA-Code: Agent Data Science Code Generation Benchmark for Large Language Models (2024.emnlp-main)
Copied to clipboard
Yiming Huang, Jianwen Luo, Yan Yu, Yitong Zhang, Fangyu Lei, Yifan Wei, Shizhu He, Lifu Huang, Xiao Liu, Jun Zhao, Kang Liu
| Challenge: | DA-Code is a code generation benchmark designed to assess LLMs on agent-based data science tasks. |
| Approach: | They propose a code generation benchmark specifically designed for LLMs on agent-based data science tasks. |
| Outcome: | The benchmark performs better than existing frameworks, but lacks accuracy . it is based on real-world data, and includes examples that cover a wide range of tasks . |
FEA-Bench: A Benchmark for Evaluating Repository-Level Code Generation for Feature Implementation (2025.acl-long)
Copied to clipboard
Wei Li, Xin Zhang, Zhongxin Guo, Shaoguang Mao, Wen Luo, Guangyue Peng, Yangyu Huang, Houfeng Wang, Scarlett Li
| Challenge: | Existing benchmarks focus on standalone programming problems, such as HumanEval, MBPP, and LiveCodeBench. |
| Approach: | They propose to use large language models to evaluate their ability to perform incremental development within code repositories by collecting pull requests from 83 GitHub repositorias and using rule-based and intent-based filtering to construct task instances focused on new feature development. |
| Outcome: | The proposed benchmarks show that large language models perform significantly worse in the FEA-Bench, highlighting considerable challenges in repository-level incremental code development. |
WaterBench: Towards Holistic Evaluation of Watermarks for Large Language Models (2024.acl-long)
Copied to clipboard
| Challenge: | Recent studies have developed watermarking algorithms which restrict the generation process to leave an invisible trace for watermark detection. |
| Approach: | They propose a benchmarking procedure that compares different methods to ensure consistent watermarking strength and jointly evaluates their generation and detection performance. |
| Outcome: | The proposed benchmark compares 4 open-source watermarks on 2 LLMs under 2 watermarking strengths and observes the common struggles for current methods on maintaining the generation quality. |