Evaluating Generated Commit Messages with Large Language Models
Qunhong Zeng, Yuxia Zhang, Zexiong Ma, Bo Jiang, Ningyuan Sun, Klaas-Jan Stol, Xingyu Mou, Hui Liu

TL;DR
This paper explores using Large Language Models as automated evaluators for generated commit messages, showing they outperform traditional metrics and approach human-level assessment in quality evaluation.
Contribution
It introduces a novel LLM-based evaluation method for commit messages, demonstrating its effectiveness and robustness compared to traditional automatic metrics.
Findings
LLMs with Chain-of-Thought reasoning excel in commit message evaluation
The proposed LLM evaluator outperforms traditional metrics in accuracy
The method offers a scalable alternative to human evaluation
Abstract
Commit messages are essential in software development as they serve to document and explain code changes. Yet, their quality often falls short in practice, with studies showing significant proportions of empty or inadequate messages. While automated commit message generation has advanced significantly, particularly with Large Language Models (LLMs), the evaluation of generated messages remains challenging. Traditional reference-based automatic metrics like BLEU, ROUGE-L, and METEOR have notable limitations in assessing commit message quality, as they assume a one-to-one mapping between code changes and commit messages, leading researchers to rely on resource-intensive human evaluation. This study investigates the potential of LLMs as automated evaluators for commit message quality. Through systematic experimentation with various prompt strategies and state-of-the-art LLMs, we…
Peer Reviews
No public reviews on file for this paper yet. If you reviewed it on a platform where reviews are public (OpenReview, ICLR, NeurIPS, ICML), you can paste yours below so the community can read it here.
Videos
No videos yet. Explain this paper in a talk, walkthrough, or lecture? Add one.
Taxonomy
TopicsSpeech and dialogue systems · Topic Modeling
