Do not copy and paste! Rewriting strategies for code retrieval

Hugging Face Daily Papers Papers

Summary

This research paper investigates text rewriting strategies for code retrieval, finding that full natural language rewriting offers the greatest performance gains. It introduces entropy-based diagnostics to help determine when costly LLM rewrites are beneficial.

Embedding-based code retrieval often suffers when encoders overfit to surface syntax. Prior work mitigates this by using LLMs to rephrase queries and corpora into a normalized style, but leaves two questions open: how much representational shift helps, and when is the per-query LLM call justified? We study a hierarchy of three rewriting strategies: stylistic rephrasing, NL-enriched PseudoCode, and full Natural-Language transcription, under joint query-corpus (QC, online) and corpus-only (C, offline) augmentation, across six CoIR benchmarks, five encoders, and three rewriters spanning independent model families (Qwen, DeepSeek, Mistral). We are the first to evaluate NL-enriched PseudoCode and snippet-level Natural Language as direct retrieval representations, rather than as transient intermediates. Full NL rewriting with QC yields the largest gains (+0.51 absolute NDCG@10 on CT-Contest for MoSE-18), while corpus-only rewriting degrades retrieval in 56 of 90 configurations, about 62%. We introduce two diagnostics, Delta H, token entropy, and Delta s, embedding cosine, and show that Delta H predicts retrieval gain under QC across all three rewriter families: pooled Spearman rho = +0.436, p < 0.001 on DeepSeek+Codestral; rho = +0.593 on Codestral alone; rho = +0.356 on Qwen. This establishes Delta H as a cheap, rewriter-agnostic proxy for deciding when rewriting pays off before running retrieval. Our analysis reframes LLM rewriting as a cost-benefit decision: it is most effective as a remediation layer for lightweight encoders on code-dominant queries, with diminishing returns for strong encoders or NL-heavy queries.
Original Article
View Cached Full Text

Cached at: 05/13/26, 12:15 PM

Paper page - Do not copy and paste! Rewriting strategies for code retrieval

Source: https://huggingface.co/papers/2605.08299

Abstract

Research investigates how different text rewriting strategies impact code retrieval performance, identifying that full natural language rewriting provides the greatest improvements while proposing entropy-based diagnostics to determine when such costly rewrites are beneficial.

Embedding-based code retrievaloften suffers when encoders overfit to surface syntax. Prior work mitigates this by using LLMs to rephrase queries and corpora into a normalized style, but leaves two questions open: how much representational shift helps, and when is the per-query LLM call justified? We study a hierarchy of three rewriting strategies:stylistic rephrasing,NL-enriched PseudoCode, and fullNatural-Language transcription, under joint query-corpus (QC, online) and corpus-only (C, offline) augmentation, across sixCoIR benchmarks, five encoders, and three rewriters spanning independent model families (Qwen, DeepSeek, Mistral). We are the first to evaluateNL-enriched PseudoCodeand snippet-level Natural Language as direct retrieval representations, rather than as transient intermediates. Full NL rewriting with QC yields the largest gains (+0.51 absolute NDCG@10 on CT-Contest for MoSE-18), while corpus-only rewriting degrades retrieval in 56 of 90 configurations, about 62%. We introduce two diagnostics,Delta H,token entropy, andDelta s,embedding cosine, and show thatDelta Hpredictsretrieval gainunder QC across all threerewriter families: pooled Spearman rho = +0.436, p < 0.001 on DeepSeek+Codestral; rho = +0.593 on Codestral alone; rho = +0.356 on Qwen. This establishesDelta Has a cheap, rewriter-agnostic proxy for deciding when rewriting pays off before running retrieval. Our analysis reframesLLM rewritingas a cost-benefit decision: it is most effective as a remediation layer for lightweight encoders on code-dominant queries, with diminishing returns for strong encoders or NL-heavy queries.

View arXiv pageView PDFAdd to collection

Get this paper in your agent:

hf papers read 2605\.08299

Don’t have the latest CLI?curl \-LsSf https://hf\.co/cli/install\.sh \| bash

Models citing this paper0

No model linking this paper

Cite arxiv.org/abs/2605.08299 in a model README.md to link it from this page.

Datasets citing this paper0

No dataset linking this paper

Cite arxiv.org/abs/2605.08299 in a dataset README.md to link it from this page.

Spaces citing this paper0

No Space linking this paper

Cite arxiv.org/abs/2605.08299 in a Space README.md to link it from this page.

Collections including this paper0

No Collection including this paper

Add this paper to acollectionto link it from this page.

Similar Articles