Exploring AI Models for Code Review: An Eye-Opening Experiment
I recently conducted a fascinating experiment using AI models for code reviews, comparing flagship tools like Claude, Gemini, Codex, Qwen, and MiniMax. The results highlighted intriguing variances in bug detection and methodological approaches.
-
Key Findings:
- Independently: The models caught only 53% of bugs, with Claude leading.
- Debate Mode: When models reviewed each other, detection soared to 80%!
- L2 Bugs: Routine bugs improved significantly, doubling from 3 to 7 out of 10 in debate mode.
-
Model Strengths:
- Claude: Best for thorough reviews of complex code.
- Gemini: Strong on structure and standards but skims key details.
- Qwen: Balances quality and practicality.
- Codex: Often catches what others miss but requires specific cues.
This groundbreaking exploration shows that models can complement each other’s weaknesses, leading to smarter, more efficient code reviews.
🔗 Curious about how AI can enhance your code review process? Dive into the full results and share your thoughts!
