arXiv preprint ·
Characterizing Overconfident Failure in LLM-Based Code Generation
- Published
- Source
- arXiv preprint, posted before peer review
- Published in
- arXiv
- DOI
- 10.48550/arxiv.2610.11300
- Original
- Read it at arXiv
- Cited by
- 0 works, as OpenAlex counts them
- Topics
Abstract
Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly used for automated code generation, but generated programs can appear syntactically plausible while still failing execution-based correctness checks. Existing validation methods, such as testing and program analysis, remain essential but are often incomplete, costly, or applied only after generation. Model-derived uncertainty is therefore a natural early reliability signal. This paper studies the dilemma of overconfidence in code LLMs where incorrect programs are often generated with token-level confidence comparable to correct programs. We study this dilemma across four open-source code models and three execution-based benchmarks. Our analysis begins by investigating whether existing uncertainty metrics provide reliable proxies for execution correctness in code generation. We then characterize overconfidence at both global and local token levels, asking whether incorrect programs remain indistinguishable from correct ones under confidence and entropy summaries, including selective generation and the limits of instruction tuning. Finally, we evaluate whether common mitigation strategies reduce this failure mode. Our study yields four findings. First, existing uncertainty signals provide only partial and model-dependent evidence of execution failure. Second, overconfidence persists at both program and token levels, and uncertainty-based selection does not consistently improve accepted-set accuracy. Third, instruction tuning can increase certainty on failing generations without consistently improving correctness discrimination. Fourth, common mitigation techniques improve specific aspects of reliability but do not reliably resolve overconfident failure. Our exploratory latent analysis suggests that hidden representations may encode correctness-related signals that output confidence does not expose.
The authors’ abstract, as arXiv lists it. arXiv’s listings, abstracts included, are free for anyone to reuse.
Read it on ReadSearch
Each opens after you create an account, and brings you back to this paper.
More in Software Engineering
Following Breadcrumbs in Code: What Accidentally Committed Ad-Hoc Logs Reveal about Developer Comprehension
Co-Modifying Application Code and Deployment Infrastructure: A Causal Study of AI Agent Pull Requests
IRONPROOF: COBOL-to-Python Transpilation with SMT-Based Equivalence Checking
Evaluation of Software Quality Through Refactoring Commit-Impact Analysis
Skill Constellations: Tracing the Supply Chain of Agent Skills on GitHub
Get the few papers worth your time in Software Engineering every morning.
ReadSearch reads the new papers in your field each day and brings you the few worth reading, each with its key finding in a sentence.