Trustworthiness of Large Language Models for Code

In recent years, Large Language Models for code (LLMc) have transformed the landscape of software engineering (SE), demonstrating significant efficacy in tasks such as code completion, summarization, review, tracing, translation, test case generation, clone detection, and bug fixing. Notably, GitHub Copilot and Google's CodeBot exemplify how LLMc contributes to substantial time and effort savings in software development. However, the widespread application of these models has raised critical concerns regarding their trustworthiness. The lack of well-defined trust metrics beyond mere accuracy poses significant risks, including potential security vulnerabilities and compromised data integrity. This dissertation proposes solving this pressing need by developing a comprehensive framework to evaluate LLMc's trustworthiness. We aim to establish contextualized definitions of trust, distrust, and trustworthiness specific to LLMc, identify key influencing factors, and create a standardized evaluation framework encompassing both model-based attributes and human-centric considerations. We will validate the framework's effectiveness through rigorous empirical studies and user evaluations and provide insights for targeted improvements in LLMc development. This dissertation seeks to enhance the reliability and transparency of LLMc, fostering their responsible integration into software engineering practices and paving the way for more trustworthy AI-assisted code generation.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Published
2025-04-27
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1109/icse-companion66252.2025.00063
Primary Topic
Software Engineering Research
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Trustworthiness of Large Language Models for Code

Dipin Khati
Software Engineering Research
article

Trustworthiness of Large Language Models for Code

Dipin Khati
article en

Abstract

In recent years, Large Language Models for code (LLMc) have transformed the landscape of software engineering (SE), demonstrating significant efficacy in tasks such as code completion, summarization, review, tracing, translation, test case generation, clone detection, and bug fixing. Notably, GitHub Copilot and Google's CodeBot exemplify how LLMc contributes to substantial time and effort savings in software development. However, the widespread application of these models has raised critical concerns regarding their trustworthiness. The lack of well-defined trust metrics beyond mere accuracy poses significant risks, including potential security vulnerabilities and compromised data integrity. This dissertation proposes solving this pressing need by developing a comprehensive framework to evaluate LLMc's trustworthiness. We aim to establish contextualized definitions of trust, distrust, and trustworthiness specific to LLMc, identify key influencing factors, and create a standardized evaluation framework encompassing both model-based attributes and human-centric considerations. We will validate the framework's effectiveness through rigorous empirical studies and user evaluations and provide insights for targeted improvements in LLMc development. This dissertation seeks to enhance the reliability and transparency of LLMc, fostering their responsible integration into software engineering practices and paving the way for more trustworthy AI-assisted code generation.

William & Mary (US), Williams (United States) (US)
Openalex Percentile: Top 81%
Software Engineering Research
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.