A Neural Model for Generating Natural Language Summaries of Program Subroutines

Source code summarization -- creating natural language descriptions of source code behavior -- is a rapidly-growing research topic with applications to automatic documentation generation, program comprehension, and software maintenance. Traditional techniques relied on heuristics and templates built manually by human experts. Recently, data-driven approaches based on neural machine translation have largely overtaken template-based systems. But nearly all of these techniques rely almost entirely on programs having good internal documentation; without clear identifier names, the models fail to create good summaries. In this paper, we present a neural model that combines words from code with code structure from an AST. Unlike previous approaches, our model processes each data source as a separate input, which allows the model to learn code structure independent of the text in code. This process helps our approach provide coherent summaries in many cases even when zero internal documentation is provided. We evaluate our technique with a dataset we created from 2.1m Java methods. We find improvement over two baseline techniques from SE literature and one from NLP literature

Automatically Extracting Subroutine Summary Descriptions from Unstructured Comments

Summary descriptions of subroutines are short (usually one-sentence) natural language explanations of a subroutine's behavior and purpose in a program. These summaries are ubiquitous in documentation, and many tools such as JavaDocs and Doxygen generate documentation built around them. And yet, extracting summaries from unstructured source code repositories remains a difficult research problem -- it is very difficult to generate clean structured documentation unless the summaries are annotated by programmers. This becomes a problem in large repositories of legacy code, since it is cost prohibitive to retroactively annotate summaries in dozens or hundreds of old programs. Likewise, it is a problem for creators of automatic documentation generation algorithms, since these algorithms usually must learn from large annotated datasets, which do not exist for many programming languages. In this paper, we present a semi-automated approach via crowdsourcing and a fully-automated approach for annotating summaries from unstructured code comments. We present experiments validating the approaches, and provide recommendations and cost estimates for automatically annotating large repositories.Comment: 10 pages, plus references. Accepted for publication in the 27th IEEE International Conference on. Software Analysis, Evolution and Reengineering London, Ontario, Canada, February 18-21, 202

Revisiting File Context for Source Code Summarization

Source code summarization is the task of writing natural language descriptions of source code. A typical use case is generating short summaries of subroutines for use in API documentation. The heart of almost all current research into code summarization is the encoder-decoder neural architecture, and the encoder input is almost always a single subroutine or other short code snippet. The problem with this setup is that the information needed to describe the code is often not present in the code itself -- that information often resides in other nearby code. In this paper, we revisit the idea of ``file context'' for code summarization. File context is the idea of encoding select information from other subroutines in the same file. We propose a novel modification of the Transformer architecture that is purpose-built to encode file context and demonstrate its improvement over several baselines. We find that file context helps on a subset of challenging examples where traditional approaches struggle.Comment: 27 pages + references, Under peer revie

Label Smoothing Improves Neural Source Code Summarization

Label smoothing is a regularization technique for neural networks. Normally neural models are trained to an output distribution that is a vector with a single 1 for the correct prediction, and 0 for all other elements. Label smoothing converts the correct prediction location to something slightly less than 1, then distributes the remainder to the other elements such that they are slightly greater than 0. A conceptual explanation behind label smoothing is that it helps prevent a neural model from becoming "overconfident" by forcing it to consider alternatives, even if only slightly. Label smoothing has been shown to help several areas of language generation, yet typically requires considerable tuning and testing to achieve the optimal results. This tuning and testing has not been reported for neural source code summarization - a growing research area in software engineering that seeks to generate natural language descriptions of source code behavior. In this paper, we demonstrate the effect of label smoothing on several baselines in neural code summarization, and conduct an experiment to find good parameters for label smoothing and make recommendations for its use

Semantic Similarity Loss for Neural Source Code Summarization

This paper presents an improved loss function for neural source code summarization. Code summarization is the task of writing natural language descriptions of source code. Neural code summarization refers to automated techniques for generating these descriptions using neural networks. Almost all current approaches involve neural networks as either standalone models or as part of a pretrained large language models e.g., GPT, Codex, LLaMA. Yet almost all also use a categorical cross-entropy (CCE) loss function for network optimization. Two problems with CCE are that 1) it computes loss over each word prediction one-at-a-time, rather than evaluating a whole sentence, and 2) it requires a perfect prediction, leaving no room for partial credit for synonyms. We propose and evaluate a loss function to alleviate this problem. In essence, we propose to use a semantic similarity metric to calculate loss over the whole output sentence prediction per training batch, rather than just loss for each word. We also propose to combine our loss with traditional CCE for each word, which streamlines the training process compared to baselines. We evaluate our approach over several baselines and report an improvement in the vast majority of conditions.Comment: 20 pages + 8 figures + 5 references. Preprint In Review Aug. 202