arXiv:2504.00255cs.CLcs.AI2025-04被引 41

评测大模型从论文复现算法代码的能力,发现顶级模型准确率仅39%。

SciReplicate-Bench: Benchmarking LLMs in Agent-driven Algorithmic Reproduction from Research Papers

  • 设计双代理框架,分别解析论文和调用代码依赖来复现算法。
  • 构建100个任务的基准测试集,最先进模型执行准确率仅39%。
  • 提出推理图匹配与依赖召回等新评估指标,适合研究AI可复现性者。

本研究评估大语言模型(LLMs)从近期NLP论文中生成代码的能力,该任务需具备两项核心能力:(1)算法理解:整合论文与学术文献信息以掌握实现逻辑;(2)编程能力:识别依赖项并正确调用必要API。为支持严谨评估,我们提出SciReplicate-Bench,一个包含36篇2024年发表的NLP论文中100个任务的基准,附有详细标注与完整测试用例。基于此,我们提出Sci-Reproducer双代理框架,由论文代理解析文献中的算法概念,代码代理从仓库中检索依赖并实现方案。为评估算法理解,引入推理图准确率,量化生成与参考推理图之间的相似性(基于代码注释与结构)。评估实施质量时采用执行准确率、CodeBLEU及仓库依赖/API召回率。实验对比多种非推理与推理型LLM,最佳模型执行准确率仅为39%,凸显基准难度。分析表明,算法描述缺失或不一致是复现失败的关键障碍。数据集与代码已公开于https://github.com/xyzCS/SciReplicate-Bench,项目主页见https://xyzcs.github.io/scireplicate.github.io/。

原文摘要 · Abstract (English)

This study evaluates large language models (LLMs) in generating code from algorithm descriptions in recent NLP papers. The task requires two key competencies: (1) algorithm comprehension: synthesizing information from papers and academic literature to understand implementation logic, and (2) coding expertise: identifying dependencies and correctly implementing necessary APIs. To facilitate rigorous evaluation, we introduce SciReplicate-Bench, a benchmark of 100 tasks from 36 NLP papers published in 2024, featuring detailed annotations and comprehensive test cases. Building on SciReplicate-Bench, we propose Sci-Reproducer, a dual-agent framework consisting of a Paper Agent that interprets algorithmic concepts from literature and a Code Agent that retrieves dependencies from repositories and implements solutions. To assess algorithm understanding, we introduce reasoning graph accuracy, which quantifies similarity between generated and reference reasoning graphs derived from code comments and structure. For evaluating implementation quality, we employ execution accuracy, CodeBLEU, and repository dependency/API recall metrics. In our experiments, we evaluate various powerful non-reasoning and reasoning LLMs as foundational models. The best-performing LLM using \ModelName~achieves only 39% execution accuracy, highlighting the benchmark's difficulty. Our analysis identifies missing or inconsistent algorithm descriptions as key barriers to successful reproduction. We make available our benchmark and code at https://github.com/xyzCS/SciReplicate-Bench and project homepage at https://xyzcs.github.io/scireplicate.github.io/.

代码生成算法复现大模型评测NLP

Thank you to arXiv for use of its open access interoperability. PaperDance 不是 arXiv 官方产品;中文卡片由大模型生成,请以原文为准。