March 2026

Conference Paper

ChatPORT: Fine-Tuned LLM for Easy Code {PORT}ing

By:
Pophale, Swaroop S; Jin, Zheming ; Teranishi, Keita
Page Number:
197-211
Volume:
16123
Book Title:
OpenMP: Balancing Productivity and Performance Portability
Publication Date:
March 2026
Publisher Location:
Springer Cham, United States of America
Conference Name:
21st International Workshop on OpenMP (IWOMP 2025)
Conference Location:
Charlotte, North Carolina, United States of America
Conference Sponsor:
Springer
View DOI Listing:
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-032-06343-4_13

Abstract

Fine-tuning existing LLMs for specialized tasks has become a very attractive alternative due to its low cost and quick development cycle. With many pre-trained LLMs available, it is an increasingly complex task to choose the correct model as the starting point or base model. In this work we discuss ChatPORT - a specialized fine-tuned LLM geared towards providing correctly translated codes from one programming model to another. We evaluate a number of base models and compare and contrast their features and characteristics that make them a viable starting point. In this paper, we focus on the OpenMP offload porting capabilities of ChatPORT. We build our training data using kernels from the Heterogeneous Computing Benchmarks (HeCBench) [12] and the OpenMP Validation and Verification suite [5] to fine-tune the base models. We then test the model using unseen kernels extracted from the HeCBench benchmark suite. Our results show that: (1) not all open LLMs geared towards HPC are aware of programming models like OpenMP, (2) although all base models benefit from fine-tuning they learn differently and produce different correctness rates, (3) depending on the memory size and compute resource available, different base models can be used for fine-tuning without significantly affecting the quality of transpiled code they generate, (4) fine-tuning improved the correctness rate of the LLM by an average of 43.2%, and (5) feedback-based training data further increased the correctness rate by an average of 6% over the LLMs tested.