Track papers across labs, topics, and trends.
Search papers, labs, and topics across Lattice.
The paper introduces CodeRQ-Bench, a new benchmark designed to evaluate the reasoning quality of LLMs across code generation, summarization, and classification tasks. Through analysis of 1,069 mismatch cases in existing evaluators, the authors identify key limitations and derive design insights for improved reasoning evaluation in coding. They then propose VERA, a two-stage evaluator that combines evidence-grounded verification with ambiguity-aware score correction, demonstrating significant performance gains over existing baselines on CodeRQ-Bench.
Current LLM benchmarks miss the mark when it comes to evaluating the *reasoning* behind code generation, summarization, and classification, but a new benchmark and evaluator close the gap.
Large language models (LLMs) increasingly rely on explicit reasoning to solve coding tasks, yet evaluating the quality of this reasoning remains challenging. Existing reasoning evaluators are not designed for coding, and current benchmarks focus primarily on code generation, leaving other coding tasks largely unexplored. We introduce CodeRQ-Bench, the first benchmark for evaluating LLM reasoning quality across three coding task categories: generation, summarization, and classification. Using this benchmark, we analyze 1,069 mismatch cases from existing evaluators, identify five recurring limitations, and derive four design insights for reasoning evaluation in coding tasks. Guided by these insights, we propose VERA, a two-stage evaluator that combines evidence-grounded verification with ambiguity-aware score correction. Experiments on CodeRQ-Bench show that VERA consistently outperforms strong baselines across four datasets, improving AUCROC by up to 0.26 and AUPRC by up to 0.21. We release CodeRQ-Bench at https://github.com/MrLYG/CodeRQ-Bench, supporting future investigations.