FGit: Fault-Guided Fine-Tuning for Code Generation
Lishui Fan, Zhongxin Liu, Haoye Wang, Lingfeng Bao, Xin Xia, Shanping Li
Abstract
Modern instruction-tuned large language models (LLMs) have made remarkable progress in code generation. However, these LLMs fine-tuned with standard supervised finetuning (SFT) sometimes generate plausible-looking but functionally incorrect code variants. This issue likely stems from the limitation of standard SFT, which treats all tokens equally during optimization and fails to emphasize the error-sensitive segments-specific code differences between correct implementations and similar incorrect variants. To address this problem, we propose Fault-Guided Fine-Tuning (FGIT), a novel finetuning technique that enhances LLMs' code generation by (1) extracting multi-granularity (line/token-level) differences between correct and incorrect yet similar implementations to identify error-sensitive segments, and (2) dynamically prioritizing those segments during training via dynamic loss weighting. Through extensive experiments on seven LLMs across three widely-used benchmarks, our method achieves an average relative improvement of 6.9% on pass@1, with some enhanced 6.7B LLMs outperforming closed-source models, e.g., GPT-3.5-Turbo. Furthermore, our fine-tuning technique demonstrates strong generalization with performance improvements ranging from 3.8% to 19.1% across diverse instruction-tuned LLMs, and our ablation studies confirm the contributions of different granularities of differences and hyperparameters.
Ask about this paper
Your agent reads all of it.
Lune indexed this paper to the last equation, along with the top-tier papers that cite it. Ask a question and the answer quotes them.
Builds on24
- Training language models to follow instructions with human feedbackLong Ouyang, Jeffrey Wu, Xu Jiang, Diogo Almeida et al.NeurIPS 2022 · 24,707 citations
- Direct Preference Optimization: Your Language Model is Secretly a Reward ModelRafael Rafailov, Archit Sharma, Eric Mitchell, Christopher D. Manning et al.NeurIPS 2023 · 10,924 citations
- Unsupervised Data Augmentation for Consistency TrainingQizhe Xie, Zihang Dai, Eduard H. Hovy, Thang Luong et al.NeurIPS 2020 · 2,774 citations
- Is Your Code Generated by ChatGPT Really Correct? Rigorous Evaluation of Large Language Models for Code GenerationJiawei Liu, Chunqiu Steven Xia, Yuyao Wang, Lingming ZhangNeurIPS 2023 · 2,317 citations
- WizardCoder: Empowering Code Large Language Models with Evol-InstructZiyang Luo, Can Xu, Pu Zhao, Qingfeng Sun et al.ICLR 2024 · 945 citations
Related papers
- On the Generalization of SFT: A Reinforcement Learning Perspective with Reward RectificationYongliang Wu, Yizhou Zhou, Ziheng Zhou, Yingzhe Peng et al.ICLR 2026 · 130 citations
- Do Large Language Models Pay Similar Attention Like Human Programmers When Generating Code?Bonan Kou, Shengmai Chen, Zhijie Wang, Lei Ma et al.FSE 2024 · 8 citations
- API Pack: A Massive Multi-Programming Language Dataset for API Call GenerationZhen Guo, Adriana Meza Soria, Wei Sun, Yikang Shen et al.ICLR 2025
- Fixing Large Language Models' Specification Misunderstanding for Better Code GenerationZhao Tian, Junjie Chen, Xiangyu ZhangICSE 2025 · 6 citations
- Evaluation of LLMs on Syntax-Aware Code Fill-in-the-Middle TasksLinyuan Gong, Sida Wang, Mostafa Elhoushi, Alvin CheungICML 2024 · 33 citations
