Exploring the Effectiveness of LLMs in Automated Logging Generation: An Empirical Study
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Automated logging statement generation supports developers in documenting critical software runtime behavior. Given the great success in natural language generation and programming language comprehension, large language models (LLMs) might help developers generate logging statements, but this has not yet been investigated. To fill the gap, this paper performs the first study on exploring LLMs for logging statement generation.We first build a logging statement generation dataset, LogBench, with two parts: (1) LogBench-O: logging statements collected from GitHub repositories, and (2) LogBench-T: the transformed unseen code from LogBench-O. Then, we leverage LogBench to evaluate the effectiveness and generalization capabilities (using LogBench-T) of eleven top-performing LLMs. In addition, we examine the performance of these LLMs against classical retrieval-based and machine learning-based logging methods from the era preceding LLMs. We further evaluate LLM's logging generalization capabilities using unseen data (LogBench-T) derived from code transformation techniques. While existing LLMs deliver decent predictions on logging levels and logging variables, our study indicates that they only achieve a maximum BLEU score of 0.249, thus calling for improvements. The paper also highlights the importance of prompt constructions and external factors (e.g., programming contexts and code comments) for LLMs' logging performance. Based on these findings, we identify five implications and provide practical advice for future logging research. Our empirical analysis discloses the limitations of current logging approaches while showcasing the potential of LLM-based logging tools, and provides actionable guidance for building more practical models.
Key facts. Cited by 9 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). First posted on arXiv 12 Jul 2023.
Builds on
No reference list yet.
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2023: 1; 2024: 5; 2025: 3.
9 papers.
- 2023Large Language Models for Software Engineering: A Systematic Literature Reviewcited by 389
- 2024Automatic Programming: Large Language Models and Beyondcited by 35
- 2024Face It Yourselves: An LLM-Based Two-Stage Strategy to Localize Configuration Errors via Logscited by 17
- 2024Demystifying and Extracting Fault-indicating Information from Logs for Failure Diagnosiscited by 6
- 2025AdaptiveLog: An Adaptive Log Analysis Framework with the Collaboration of Large and Small Language Modelcited by 4
- 2024Contextualized Data-Wrangling Code Generation in Computational Notebookscited by 3
- 2025Benchmarking AI Models in Software Engineering: A Review, Search Tool, and Unified Approach for Elevating Benchmark Qualitycited by 3
- 2024LUK: Empowering Log Understanding with Expert Knowledge from Large Language Modelscited by 2
- 2025Automated File-Level Logging Generation for Machine Learning Applications using LLMs: A Case Study using GPT-4o Minicited by 1
- 2025Automated File-Level Logging Generation for Machine Learning Applications using LLMs: A Case Study using GPT-4o Mini6 Aug 2025
- 2025Benchmarking AI Models in Software Engineering: A Review, Search Tool, and Unified Approach for Elevating Benchmark Quality7 Mar 2025
- 2025AdaptiveLog: An Adaptive Log Analysis Framework with the Collaboration of Large and Small Language Model19 Jan 2025
- 2024Demystifying and Extracting Fault-indicating Information from Logs for Failure Diagnosis20 Sep 2024
- 2024Contextualized Data-Wrangling Code Generation in Computational Notebooks20 Sep 2024
- 2024LUK: Empowering Log Understanding with Expert Knowledge from Large Language Models3 Sep 2024
- 2024Automatic Programming: Large Language Models and Beyond3 May 2024
- 2024Face It Yourselves: An LLM-Based Two-Stage Strategy to Localize Configuration Errors via Logs31 Mar 2024
- 2023Large Language Models for Software Engineering: A Systematic Literature Review21 Aug 2023