Are Large Language Models Memorizing Bug Benchmarks?

Large Language Models (LLMs) have become integral to various software engineering tasks, including code generation, bug detection, and repair. To evaluate model performance in these domains, numerous bug benchmarks containing real-world bugs from software projects have been developed. However, a growing concern within the software engineering community is that these benchmarks may not reliably reflect true LLM performance due to the risk of data leakage. Despite this concern, limited research has been conducted to quantify the impact of potential leakage.In this paper, we systematically evaluate popular LLMs to assess their susceptibility to data leakage from widely used bug benchmarks. To identify potential leakage, we use multiple metrics, including a study of benchmark membership within commonly used training datasets, as well as analyses of negative log-likelihood and 5-gram accuracy. Our findings show that certain models, in particular codegen-multi, exhibit significant evidence of memorization in widely used benchmarks like Defects4J, while newer models trained on larger datasets like LLaMa 3.1 exhibit limited signs of leakage. These results highlight the need for careful benchmark selection and the adoption of robust metrics to adequately assess models capabilities.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Published
2025-05-03
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1109/llm4code66737.2025.00005
Citations
5
Primary Topic
Software Engineering Research
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
16.23
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Are Large Language Models Memorizing Bug Benchmarks?

Cláudia Mamede, Claire Le Goues, Catarina Gamboa, Paulo Canelas et al.
5 citations
Software Engineering Research
16.23
article

Are Large Language Models Memorizing Bug Benchmarks?

Cláudia Mamede, Claire Le Goues, Catarina Gamboa, Paulo Canelas, Kush Jain, Daniel Ramos
article en
5 citations

Abstract

Large Language Models (LLMs) have become integral to various software engineering tasks, including code generation, bug detection, and repair. To evaluate model performance in these domains, numerous bug benchmarks containing real-world bugs from software projects have been developed. However, a growing concern within the software engineering community is that these benchmarks may not reliably reflect true LLM performance due to the risk of data leakage. Despite this concern, limited research has been conducted to quantify the impact of potential leakage.In this paper, we systematically evaluate popular LLMs to assess their susceptibility to data leakage from widely used bug benchmarks. To identify potential leakage, we use multiple metrics, including a study of benchmark membership within commonly used training datasets, as well as analyses of negative log-likelihood and 5-gram accuracy. Our findings show that certain models, in particular codegen-multi, exhibit significant evidence of memorization in widely used benchmarks like Defects4J, while newer models trained on larger datasets like LLaMa 3.1 exhibit limited signs of leakage. These results highlight the need for careful benchmark selection and the adoption of robust metrics to adequately assess models capabilities.

Carnegie Mellon University (US)
Openalex Percentile: Top 1%
Software Engineering Research
16.23
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.

Are Large Language Models Memorizing Bug Benchmarks? — Cláudia Mamede, Claire Le Goues, et al. · (2025) | TGRS Research Map | TGRS