Matched via arXiv identifier search
- Stars
- 0
- Last push
- Jun 15, 2026 (3d ago)
Risk flags
- No tagged releases
- No Docker setup
- Low confidence match
Jiayin Lei, Ming Ma, Yunxi Duan, Chenxi Li, Tianming Yang
Core AI workload signals detected from paper context and implementation/artifact evidence.
Synthetic data has become essential for training code generation models, yet it introduces significant noise and hallucinations that are difficult to detect with current metrics. Existing data selection methods like Instruction-Following Difficulty (IFD) typically assess how hard a model generates an answer given a query ($A|Q$). However, this metric is ambiguous on noisy synthetic data, where low probability can dis ...
tinguish between intrinsic task complexity and model-generated hallucinations. Here, we propose QAQ, a novel data selection framework that evaluates data quality from the reverse direction: how well can the answer predict the query ($Q|A$)? We define Reverse Mutual Information (RMI) to quantify the information gain about the query conditioned on the answer. Our analyses reveal that both extremes of RMI signal quality issues: low RMI indicates semantic misalignment, while excessively high RMI may contain defect patterns that LLMs easily recognize. Furthermore, we introduce a selection strategy based on the disagreement between strong and weak models to identify samples that are valid yet challenging. Experiments on the WarriorCoder dataset demonstrate that selecting just 25% of data using stratified RMI achieves comparable performance to full-data training, significantly outperforming existing data selection methods. Our approach highlights the importance of bidirectional semantic coherence in synthetic data curation, offering a scalable pathway to reduce computational costs without sacrificing model capability.
Audit each benchmark finding before selecting an implementation path. Evidence refs map to the disclosure section below.
| Task | Dataset | Metric | Value | Source | Evidence refs |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Instruction tuning | HumanEval | pass@1 | 100 | paper-derived | No explicit refs |
| Instruction tuning | MBPP | pass@1 | 78.05 | paper-derived | No explicit refs |
| Instruction tuning | Full Data | % | 100 | paper-derived | No explicit refs |
Synthetic data has become essential for training code generation models, yet it introduces significant noise and hallucinations that are difficult to detect with current metrics.
Recommendation evidence is currently too limited for a maintained-repo choice. Use Implementation Status and Reproduction Path for a practical baseline plan.
Hardware Notes
Expect multi-day setup/compute for meaningful reproduction based on current guidance.
Evidence graph: 2 refs, 1 links.
Utility signals: depth 95/100, grounding 68/100, status medium.
Compare maintenance quality, reproducibility coverage, and evidence confidence before choosing a reproduction baseline.
Matched via arXiv identifier search
Risk flags
There is no verified maintained implementation yet. Use this baseline plan to decide whether to prototype now or defer.
Hardware requirements
No verified implementation available
No additional verified repositories beyond the primary recommendation.
These repositories had low-confidence matching signals and are hidden by default.
No trustworthy direct or curated related Hugging Face artifacts were found yet.
Continue with targeted Hugging Face searches derived from the paper title and method context:
Models
Tip: start with models, then check datasets/spaces if you need evaluation data or demos.
Direct artifact matches are currently sparse. Use targeted Hugging Face searches to quickly locate candidate models, datasets, and demos.
Tasks
Instruction tuning
Methods
Transformer
Domains
Large Language Models
Evaluation & Human Feedback Data
Open this paper in HFEPX to review benchmark signals, evaluation modes, and human-feedback protocol context.
Open in HFEPXExplore Similar Papers
Jump to Paper2Code search queries derived from this paper's research context.
Need human evaluators for your AI research? Scale annotation with expert AI Trainers.