Papers
arxiv:2412.20340

Distilling Desired Comments for Enhanced Code Review with Large Language Models

Published on Dec 29, 2024
Authors:
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,

Abstract

A dataset distillation method called Desiview automatically constructs a distilled dataset to improve LLMs' code review ability by identifying desired review comments, with enhanced models showing superior performance over base models.

AI-generated summary

There has been a growing interest in using Large Language Models (LLMs) for code review thanks to their proven proficiency in code comprehension. The primary objective of most review scenarios is to generate desired review comments (DRCs) that explicitly identify issues to trigger code fixes. However, existing LLM-based solutions are not so effective in generating DRCs for various reasons such as hallucination. To enhance their code review ability, they need to be fine-tuned with a customized dataset that is ideally full of DRCs. Nevertheless, such a dataset is not yet available, while manual annotation of DRCs is too laborious to be practical. In this paper, we propose a dataset distillation method, Desiview, which can automatically construct a distilled dataset by identifying DRCs from a code review dataset. Experiments on the CodeReviewer dataset comprising more than 150K review entries show that Desiview achieves an impressive performance of 88.93%, 80.37%, 86.67%, and 84.44% in terms of Precision, Recall, Accuracy, and F1, respectively, surpassing state-of-the-art methods. To validate the effect of such a distilled dataset on enhancing LLMs' code review ability, we first fine-tune the latest LLaMA series (i.e., LLaMA 3 and LLaMA 3.1) to build model Desiview4FT. We then enhance the model training effect through KTO alignment by feeding those review comments identified as non-DRCs to the LLMs, resulting in model Desiview4FA. Verification results indicate that Desiview4FA slightly outperforms Desiview4FT, while both models have significantly improved against the base models in terms of generating DRCs. Human evaluation confirms that both models identify issues more accurately and tend to generate review comments that better describe the issues contained in the code than the base LLMs do.

Community

Sign up or log in to comment

Models citing this paper 0

No model linking this paper

Cite arxiv.org/abs/2412.20340 in a model README.md to link it from this page.

Datasets citing this paper 0

No dataset linking this paper

Cite arxiv.org/abs/2412.20340 in a dataset README.md to link it from this page.

Spaces citing this paper 0

No Space linking this paper

Cite arxiv.org/abs/2412.20340 in a Space README.md to link it from this page.

Collections including this paper 0

No Collection including this paper

Add this paper to a collection to link it from this page.