Quality taxonomies
RQ1 describes generated-code outcomes. RQ2 describes properties of training samples and corpora. Coding is multi-label: a paper can support several headings, once per heading. Counts indicate research attention and do not measure defect prevalence.
RQ1: Generated-code quality
| Dimension | Immediate failure condition |
|---|---|
| Correctness | Syntax, logic, API, or dependency failures under task-required conditions |
| Security | Weaknesses permitting unauthorized access, disclosure, alteration, or unsafe execution |
| Compliance | Licensing, privacy, harmful-content, or other rights-related problems |
| Robustness | Failure to tolerate abnormal inputs, boundary cases, or runtime disruption |
| Maintainability | Structure or coupling that makes modification and extension difficult |
| Understandability | Naming, comments, or expressions that obscure intent |
| Efficiency | Excessive execution time or memory for the required behavior |
| Generation Derailment | Repetition, truncation, verbosity, or deviation from generation instructions |
The immediate failure condition determines the heading when manifestations overlap. A redundant structure that impedes modification concerns Maintainability; repetitive or instruction-divergent output concerns Generation Derailment.
The 195 paper–dimension memberships involve 98 papers. Correctness has the largest literature coverage. The codebook gives operational definitions and inclusion/exclusion boundaries.
RQ2: Training-data quality
Code attributes comprise Correctness, Security, Compliance, Robustness, Maintainability, Understandability, and Efficiency. They concern the code sample itself.
Non-code and corpus attributes comprise textual Compliance and Security Risks, Distribution Imbalance, Redundancy, Inadequate Diversity, Data Contamination Risks, and Low-Value Data. They concern surrounding content, supervision, composition, or training–evaluation overlap.
The 165 paper–heading memberships involve 78 papers. Distribution imbalance concerns relative frequency among represented strata; inadequate diversity concerns absent or effectively uncovered strata. Redundancy concerns repetition within training data; contamination concerns overlap with evaluation material.
Supporting papers
Browse 106 distinct papers by quality category. Expand a category to see its supporting papers, or select a linked category above to open it directly. Membership is multi-label: a paper appears in every category it supports, so category counts should not be added to obtain a distinct-paper total. Stable study IDs link each entry to the complete 114-paper register.
RQ1 · Generated-code quality
Correctness 74 papers
Generated code fails to implement intended semantics or to execute validly.
Security 27 papers
Generated code contains weaknesses permitting unauthorized access disclosure alteration or unsafe execution.
Compliance 14 papers
Generated code violates legal ethical or regulatory constraints.
Robustness 11 papers
Generated code cannot remain stable under abnormal inputs boundary conditions or non-malicious runtime disruptions.
Maintainability 23 papers
Generated code is difficult to modify extend or reuse without introducing risk.
Understandability 13 papers
Humans have difficulty comprehending the generated code's logic intent or structure.
Efficiency 22 papers
Generated code unnecessarily consumes time or memory resources.
Generation Derailment 11 papers
The generated response departs from the task-directed course needed to provide a usable code deliverable.
RQ2 · Training-data quality
Code attributes
Correctness 21 papers
Training code samples contain syntax logical functionality API or dependency defects.
Security 13 papers
Training code samples contain vulnerabilities credentials or high-risk implementation patterns.
Compliance 6 papers
Training code samples violate legal ethical or regulatory requirements.
Robustness 2 papers
Training code samples lack fault tolerance for abnormal inputs boundary cases or runtime variation.
Maintainability 8 papers
Training code samples have structures that are difficult to modify extend or reuse.
Understandability 7 papers
Training code samples express logic or intent unclearly.
Efficiency 6 papers
Training code samples contain resource-wasting or algorithmically suboptimal implementations.
Non-code and corpus attributes
Compliance and Security Risks (Textual) 5 papers
Non-code textual training content is harmful copyright-infringing or privacy-leaking.
Distribution Imbalance Issues 29 papers
The corpus is uneven across languages domains resources data types tasks or difficulty.
Redundancy Issues 16 papers
The corpus contains duplicate near-duplicate or excessively repetitive samples.
Inadequate Diversity 26 papers
The corpus insufficiently covers scenarios domains edge cases environments or solution forms.
Data Contamination Risks 7 papers
Training data overlap with evaluation benchmarks or otherwise leak test solutions.
Low-Value Data 19 papers
Training data contributes little useful learning signal or introduces noise and error.