Expanding Queries for Code Search Using Semantically Related API Class-names
Bibliographic record
Abstract
When encountering unfamiliar programming tasks (e.g., connecting to a database), there is a need to seek potential working code examples. Instead of using code search engines, software developers usually post related programming questions on online Q&A forums (e.g., Stack Overflow). One possible reason is that existing code search engines would return effective code examples only if a query contains identifiers (e.g., class or method names). In other words, existing code search engines do not handle natural-language queries well (e.g., a description of a programming task). However, developers may not know the appropriate identifiers at the time of the search. As the demand of searching code examples is increasing, it is of significant interest to enhance code search engines. We conjecture that expanding natural-language queries with their semantically related identifiers has a great potential to enhance code search engines. In this paper, we propose an automated approach to find identifiers (in particular API class-names) that are semantically related to a given natural-language query. We evaluate the effectiveness of our approach using 74 queries on a corpus of 23,677,216 code snippets that are extracted from 24,666 open source Java projects. The results show that our approach can effectively recommend semantically related API class-names to expand the original natural-language queries. For instance, our approach successfully retrieves relevant code examples in the top 10 retrieved results for 76 percent of 74 queries, while it is 36 percent when using the original natural-language query; and the median rank of the first relevant code example is increased from 22 to 7.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.019 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.009 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.003 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".