Update evaluation/intro.md
Browse files- evaluation/intro.md +2 -26
evaluation/intro.md
CHANGED
@@ -1,31 +1,7 @@
|
|
1 |
A natural way to evaluate code programs is to see if they pass unit tests, it is the idea behind the [pass@k](https://huggingface.co/metrics/code_eval) metric, a popular evaluation framework for code generation models, on [HumanEval](https://huggingface.co/datasets/openai_humaneval) dataset, which was introduced in [Codex paper](https://arxiv.org/pdf/2107.03374v2.pdf). The dataset includes 164 handwritten programming problems. In the pass@k metric, k code samples are generated per problem, and a problem is considered solved if any sample passes the unit tests and the total fraction of problems solved is reported.
|
2 |
-
In most papers, 200 candidate program completions are sampled, and pass@1, pass@10, and pass@100 are computed using an unbiased sampling estimator.
|
3 |
|
4 |
-
|
5 |
-
|
6 |
-
Model | pass@1 | pass@10 | pass@100|
|
7 |
-
|-------|--------|---------|---------|
|
8 |
-
|CodeParrot (110M) | 3.80% | 6.57% | 12.78% |
|
9 |
-
|CodeParrot (1.5B) | 3.58% | 8.03% | 14.96% |
|
10 |
-
|||||
|
11 |
-
|InCoder (6.7B) | 15.2% | 27.8% | 47.00% |
|
12 |
-
|||||
|
13 |
-
|PolyCoder (160M)| 2.13% | 3.35% | 4.88% |
|
14 |
-
|PolyCoder (400M)| 2.96% | 5.29% | 11.59% |
|
15 |
-
|PolyCoder (2.7B)| 5.59% | 9.84% | 17.68% |
|
16 |
-
|||||
|
17 |
-
|CodeGen-Mono (350M)| 12.76% | 23.11% | 35.19% |
|
18 |
-
|CodeGen-Mono (2.7B)| 23.70% | 36.64% | 57.01% |
|
19 |
-
|CodeGen-Mono (6.1B)| 26.13% | 42.29% | 65.82% |
|
20 |
-
|CodeGen-Mono (16.1B)| **29.28%** | **49.86%** | **75.00%** |
|
21 |
-
|||||
|
22 |
-
|Codex (25M)| 3.21% | 7.1% | 12.89%|
|
23 |
-
|Codex (300M)| 13.17%| 20.37% | 36.27% |
|
24 |
-
|Codex (12B)| 28.81%| 46.81% | 72.31% |
|
25 |
-
|
26 |
-
</div>
|
27 |
-
|
28 |
-
For better visualization, we plot the pass@100 for the models above by model size.
|
29 |
<p align="center">
|
30 |
<img src="https://huggingface.co/datasets/loubnabnl/repo-images/resolve/main/plot_pass@100.png" alt="drawing" width="550"/>
|
31 |
</p>
|
|
|
1 |
A natural way to evaluate code programs is to see if they pass unit tests, it is the idea behind the [pass@k](https://huggingface.co/metrics/code_eval) metric, a popular evaluation framework for code generation models, on [HumanEval](https://huggingface.co/datasets/openai_humaneval) dataset, which was introduced in [Codex paper](https://arxiv.org/pdf/2107.03374v2.pdf). The dataset includes 164 handwritten programming problems. In the pass@k metric, k code samples are generated per problem, and a problem is considered solved if any sample passes the unit tests and the total fraction of problems solved is reported.
|
2 |
+
In most papers, 200 candidate program completions are sampled, and pass@1, pass@10, and pass@100 are computed using an unbiased sampling estimator.
|
3 |
|
4 |
+
This plot shows the pass@100 by model size, for CodeParrot, InCoder, PolyCoder, CodeGen and Codex (not open-source):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5 |
<p align="center">
|
6 |
<img src="https://huggingface.co/datasets/loubnabnl/repo-images/resolve/main/plot_pass@100.png" alt="drawing" width="550"/>
|
7 |
</p>
|