ChatGPT's Performance on LeetCode Coding Challenges: An Empirical Analysis Across Difficulty Levels, Prompt Engineering Techniques, and Programming Languages

Core Concepts

While ChatGPT demonstrates promising code generation capabilities, its performance is significantly impacted by problem complexity, programming language, and prompt engineering techniques, highlighting the need for further research and development in automated code generation.

Abstract

• Bibliographic Information: Li, M., & Krishnamachari, B. (2024). Evaluating ChatGPT-3.5 Efficiency in Solving Coding Problems of Different Complexity Levels: An Empirical Analysis. arXiv preprint arXiv:2411.07529v1.

• Research Objective: This paper investigates the effectiveness of ChatGPT, primarily the GPT-3.5-turbo model, in solving coding problems of varying difficulty levels on the LeetCode platform. The research explores the impact of prompt engineering techniques and examines the model's performance across different programming languages.

• Methodology: The researchers used a dataset of 1,475 LeetCode problems categorized into easy, medium, and hard levels. They developed Python scripts to automate interactions with the ChatGPT API, submitting prompts and collecting responses. The correctness of the generated code was evaluated based on LeetCode's integrated compiler and test cases. Prompt engineering techniques, including chain-of-thought prompting and incorporating failed test cases, were employed to assess their impact on performance. Additionally, the study compared the performance of GPT-3.5-turbo with GPT-4, Claude 3 Sonnet, and Gemini 1.0 Pro. The model's proficiency was also evaluated across various programming languages, including Python, C++, Java, Elixir, Erlang, and Racket.

• Key Findings:

  • ChatGPT's success rate decreased as problem difficulty increased, with 92% success on easy problems, 79% on medium problems, and 51% on hard problems.
  • Prompt engineering, particularly incorporating failed test cases, significantly improved performance, especially on medium and hard problems.
  • GPT-4 outperformed GPT-3.5-turbo across all difficulty levels, demonstrating the impact of model advancements.
  • ChatGPT exhibited strong performance in Python and Java but struggled with C++, Elixir, Erlang, and Racket, highlighting language-specific challenges.
  • The model excelled in solving hash table, search, and divide-and-conquer problems but faced difficulties with database, dynamic programming, and greedy algorithms.
  • Shorter, more concise code solutions were generally more likely to be correct.

• Main Conclusions: ChatGPT shows promise for automated code generation but exhibits limitations in handling complex algorithms, certain programming languages, and specific problem types. Prompt engineering plays a crucial role in enhancing performance, and model advancements, like GPT-4, contribute to improved problem-solving capabilities.

• Significance: This research provides valuable insights into the strengths and weaknesses of ChatGPT in code generation tasks, informing future research and development efforts in automated coding assistance.

• Limitations and Future Research: The study primarily focused on LeetCode problems, which may not fully represent real-world coding scenarios. Future research could explore ChatGPT's performance on more diverse and complex coding tasks, investigate the impact of different prompt engineering techniques, and develop language-specific optimizations to enhance the model's capabilities across a wider range of programming languages.

Stats

GPT-3.5-turbo successfully solved 92% of easy problems, 79% of medium problems, and 51% of hard problems.
Chain-of-thought prompting improved performance by 29% for easy problems, 19% for medium problems, and 14% for hard problems.
Incorporating failed test cases into the prompts resulted in improvements of 38% for easy problems, 60% for medium problems, and 45% for hard problems.
GPT-4 achieved improvements of 33% for easy problems, 58% for medium problems, and 52% for hard problems compared to GPT-3.5-turbo.
In C++, ChatGPT solved 50% of the problems it could solve in Python.
In Java, ChatGPT solved 70% of the problems it could solve in Python.
ChatGPT was unable to solve any problems in Elixir, Erlang, or Racket.

Quotes

"These results highlight the model’s competence in simpler tasks, but also reveal its challenges when handling more complex coding problems."
"This indicates that CoT prompting combined with error-focused adjustments can be highly effective, especially as the complexity of the problem increases."
"This may be attributed to the lower frequency of these languages in the model’s training data set."

Key Insights Distilled From

Evaluating ChatGPT-3.5 Efficiency in Solving Coding Problems of Different Complexity Levels: An Empirical Analysis

by Minda Li, Bh... at arxiv.org 11-13-2024

https://arxiv.org/pdf/2411.07529.pdf

Deeper Inquiries

How might the integration of external libraries and APIs impact ChatGPT's code generation capabilities and problem-solving potential?

Integrating external libraries and APIs could significantly enhance ChatGPT's code generation capabilities and problem-solving potential in several ways:

Expanded Functionality: Access to external libraries would allow ChatGPT to leverage pre-built functions and modules, eliminating the need to generate code for common tasks. This would free up the model to focus on higher-level logic and problem-solving, potentially leading to more efficient and sophisticated solutions. For example, instead of writing code to parse a CSV file from scratch, ChatGPT could simply use a library like Pandas in Python.
Domain-Specific Expertise: Many APIs provide access to specialized domains like machine learning (TensorFlow, PyTorch), natural language processing (NLTK, SpaCy), or web scraping (Beautiful Soup). Integration with these APIs would empower ChatGPT to generate code for a wider range of applications, including those requiring domain-specific knowledge.
Real-World Applicability: Real-world software development heavily relies on external libraries and APIs. By incorporating these resources into its training and code generation process, ChatGPT would produce more practical and readily deployable solutions.
Improved Accuracy and Efficiency: Leveraging well-tested libraries and APIs could reduce the likelihood of errors in ChatGPT's generated code. This is because these resources have often undergone extensive testing and optimization by the developer community.
However, challenges also exist:

Contextual Understanding: ChatGPT would need to accurately understand the functionality of different libraries and APIs to use them effectively. This would require sophisticated mechanisms for parsing documentation, understanding code examples, and reasoning about the appropriate use of external resources.
Dependency Management: Real-world projects often involve managing complex dependencies between libraries and APIs. ChatGPT would need to be able to handle these dependencies gracefully, ensuring that the generated code is consistent and functional.
Security Risks: Incorporating external code always introduces potential security vulnerabilities. ChatGPT would need robust mechanisms to evaluate the trustworthiness of libraries and APIs and to mitigate potential risks.

Could ChatGPT's reliance on pattern recognition and statistical relationships in code hinder its ability to develop truly innovative and unconventional solutions?

Yes, ChatGPT's reliance on pattern recognition and statistical relationships in code could potentially hinder its ability to develop truly innovative and unconventional solutions. Here's why:

Bias Towards Existing Patterns: ChatGPT learns by identifying patterns and relationships in its vast training dataset of code. While this enables it to generate code that adheres to common conventions and best practices, it might also make it less likely to deviate from established norms and explore radically new approaches.
Limited Creativity and Intuition: Truly innovative solutions often stem from a deep understanding of the problem domain, creative thinking, and the ability to make intuitive leaps. While ChatGPT can mimic these processes to some extent, its current capabilities are primarily driven by statistical analysis rather than genuine creativity or intuition.
Difficulty with Abstract Concepts: Unconventional solutions often involve applying abstract concepts or transferring knowledge from seemingly unrelated domains. ChatGPT's current focus on code-level patterns might limit its ability to grasp and utilize such high-level abstractions effectively.
However, there are potential mitigating factors:

Evolving Capabilities: The field of large language models is rapidly evolving. Future iterations of ChatGPT might incorporate more sophisticated reasoning and problem-solving abilities, potentially enabling them to break free from the constraints of purely statistical approaches.
Human-AI Collaboration: Rather than replacing human developers, ChatGPT is more likely to augment their capabilities. Developers can leverage ChatGPT's code generation prowess for routine tasks, freeing up their time and cognitive resources to focus on more creative and innovative aspects of software development.

If code generation becomes increasingly automated, how might the role of software developers evolve, and what new skills will be required in this evolving landscape?

As code generation becomes increasingly automated, the role of software developers will likely evolve from primarily writing code to higher-level tasks that require creativity, problem-solving, and domain expertise. Here are some potential shifts and the new skills that will be in demand:
Evolving Roles:

Solution Architects: Developers will need to focus on understanding complex business needs and designing comprehensive software solutions that leverage automated code generation tools effectively.
Algorithm Designers: While LLMs can generate code, designing efficient and innovative algorithms will remain a core skill for developers, especially in specialized domains like machine learning or cryptography.
Code Reviewers and Testers: Ensuring the quality, security, and maintainability of automatically generated code will be crucial. Developers will need strong analytical and debugging skills to validate and refine the output of these tools.
Domain Experts: Deep understanding of specific industries and business domains will be increasingly valuable. Developers will need to bridge the gap between technical solutions and real-world applications.
New Skills:

Prompt Engineering: Effectively communicating with and guiding AI code generation tools will be essential. This involves crafting precise and unambiguous prompts that elicit the desired code output.
AI Literacy: Understanding the capabilities and limitations of AI-powered tools will be crucial for developers to make informed decisions about when and how to use them effectively.
Critical Thinking and Problem-Solving: As automation handles routine coding tasks, developers will need to focus on higher-level problem-solving, critical analysis, and creative solution design.
Collaboration and Communication: Working effectively with AI tools and collaborating with other developers and stakeholders will require strong communication and teamwork skills.
In essence, the future of software development will likely involve a symbiotic relationship between humans and AI. Developers will need to adapt their skillsets to leverage the power of automation while focusing on the creative, strategic, and domain-specific aspects of software development that require uniquely human capabilities.