Formalizing Natural Language Intent into Program Specifications via Large Language Models

AI-generated keywords: Software development

AI-generated Key Points

  • Informal natural language in software development provides valuable insights but may not always align with the actual implementation
  • Large Language Models (LLMs) can translate natural language intent into programmatically checkable assertions
  • LLM4nl2post transforms informal descriptions into formal method postconditions for identifying incorrect code
  • Generated postconditions are accurate, correct, and capable of discriminating faulty code
  • LLM4nl2post successfully identified 70 real-world bugs from Defects4J across different programming languages
  • LLM4nl2post captures abstract functional relationships between input and output procedures effectively
  • Efforts have been made to address limitations such as data leakage concerns and model stability issues for transparency in findings
Also access our AI generated: Comprehensive summary, Lay summary, Blog-like article; or ask questions about this paper to our AI assistant.

Authors: Madeline Endres, Sarah Fakhoury, Saikat Chakraborty, Shuvendu K. Lahiri

License: CC BY 4.0

Abstract: Informal natural language that describes code functionality, such as code comments or function documentation, may contain substantial information about a programs intent. However, there is typically no guarantee that a programs implementation and natural language documentation are aligned. In the case of a conflict, leveraging information in code-adjacent natural language has the potential to enhance fault localization, debugging, and code trustworthiness. In practice, however, this information is often underutilized due to the inherent ambiguity of natural language which makes natural language intent challenging to check programmatically. The "emergent abilities" of Large Language Models (LLMs) have the potential to facilitate the translation of natural language intent to programmatically checkable assertions. However, it is unclear if LLMs can correctly translate informal natural language specifications into formal specifications that match programmer intent. Additionally, it is unclear if such translation could be useful in practice. In this paper, we describe LLM4nl2post, the problem leveraging LLMs for transforming informal natural language to formal method postconditions, expressed as program assertions. We introduce and validate metrics to measure and compare different LLM4nl2post approaches, using the correctness and discriminative power of generated postconditions. We then perform qualitative and quantitative methods to assess the quality of LLM4nl2post postconditions, finding that they are generally correct and able to discriminate incorrect code. Finally, we find that LLM4nl2post via LLMs has the potential to be helpful in practice; specifications generated from natural language were able to catch 70 real-world historical bugs from Defects4J.

Submitted to arXiv on 03 Oct. 2023

Ask questions about this paper to our AI assistant

You can also chat with multiple papers at once here.

AI assistant instructions?

Results of the summarizing process for the arXiv paper: 2310.01831v1

, , , , In the realm of software development, informal natural language often provides valuable insights into a program's intent through code comments and function documentation. However, the alignment between this natural language description and the actual implementation of a program is not always guaranteed. This misalignment can lead to challenges in fault localization, debugging, and overall code trustworthiness. Large Language Models (LLMs) have emerged as a potential solution to translate natural language intent into programmatically checkable assertions. A new approach, LLM4nl2post, leverages LLMs to transform informal natural language descriptions into formal method postconditions expressed as program assertions. By introducing and validating metrics to measure the correctness and discriminative power of generated postconditions, researchers have demonstrated that LLM4nl2post can generate accurate specifications that effectively identify incorrect code. Furthermore, qualitative and quantitative assessments have shown that these postconditions are generally correct and capable of discriminating faulty code. Moreover, the study has highlighted the practical utility of LLM4nl2post by successfully identifying 70 real-world historical bugs from Defects4J. The experiment showcases the versatility of this technique across different programming languages such as Python and Java. While machine learning-based approaches for specification generation have shown promise in various applications, including test oracle synthesis and unit test generation, LLM4nl2post stands out for its ability to capture abstract functional relationships between input and output procedures. Despite potential limitations such as data leakage concerns related to training datasets like EvalPlus and Defects4J, efforts have been made to ensure the replicability of the study results. By addressing stability issues with models accessed via OpenAI web APIs and providing access to generated artifacts, researchers aim to enhance transparency in their findings. Overall, the study underscores the significance of formalizing natural language intent into program specifications using cutting-edge technologies like Large Language Models for improved software development practices.
Created on 23 Jul. 2024

Assess the quality of the AI-generated content by voting

Score: 0

Why do we need votes?

Votes are used to determine whether we need to re-run our summarizing tools. If the count reaches -10, our tools can be restarted.

The previous summary was created more than a year ago and can be re-run (if necessary) by clicking on the Run button below.

Similar papers summarized with our AI tools

Navigate through even more similar papers through a

tree representation

Look for similar papers (in beta version)

By clicking on the button above, our algorithm will scan all papers in our database to find the closest based on the contents of the full papers and not just on metadata. Please note that it only works for papers that we have generated summaries for and you can rerun it from time to time to get a more accurate result while our database grows.

Disclaimer: The AI-based summarization tool and virtual assistant provided on this website may not always provide accurate and complete summaries or responses. We encourage you to carefully review and evaluate the generated content to ensure its quality and relevance to your needs.