DICE: Detecting In-distribution Contamination in LLM's Fine-tuning Phase for Math Reasoning
On the map: LLM reasoning → Mathematical reasoning
Abstract (arXiv)
The advancement of large language models (LLMs) relies on evaluation using public benchmarks, but data contamination can lead to overestimated performance. Previous researches focus on detecting contamination by determining whether the model has seen the exact same data during training. Besides, prior work has already shown that even training on data similar to benchmark data inflates performance, namely In-distribution contamination. In this work, we argue that in-distribution contamination can lead to the performance drop on OOD benchmarks. To effectively detect in-distribution contamination, we propose DICE, a novel method that leverages the internal states of LLMs to locate-then-detect the contamination. DICE first identifies the most sensitive layer to contamination, then trains a classifier based on the internal states of that layer. Experiments reveal DICE's high accuracy in detecting in-distribution contamination across various LLMs and math reasoning datasets. We also show the generalization capability of the trained DICE detector, which is able to detect contamination across multiple benchmarks with similar distributions. Additionally, we find that DICE's predictions correlate with the performance of LLMs fine-tuned by either us or other organizations, achieving a coefficient of determination (R2) between 0.61 and 0.75. The code and data are available at https://github.com/THU-KEG/DICE.
Key facts. Cited by 11 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Placed in Mathematical reasoning, one of 17 directions in LLM reasoning. Builds on 31 of its 41 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 6 Jun 2024.
Builds on
31 of 41 references.
Closest ancestors · 2
Same direction, newest first
- 2024A Careful Examination of Large Language Model Performance on Grade School Arithmetic1 May
- 2022Dynamic Prompt Learning via Policy Gradient for Semi-structured Mathematical Reasoning29 Sep
Other references · 29
- 2020Language Models are Few-Shot Learnerscited by 32,419
- 2023LLaMA: Open and Efficient Foundation Language Modelscited by 14,132
- 2021Training Verifiers to Solve Math Word Problemscited by 10,109
- 2019Sentence-BERT: Sentence Embeddings using Siamese BERT-Networkscited by 9,170
- 2020Measuring Massive Multitask Language Understandingcited by 7,963
- 2021Measuring Mathematical Problem Solving With the MATH Datasetcited by 5,371
- 2020Extracting Training Data from Large Language Modelscited by 2,189
- 2022Survey of Hallucination in Natural Language Generationcited by 2,075
- 2024LiveCodeBench: Holistic and Contamination Free Evaluation of Large Language Models for Codecited by 2,004
- 2023LongBench: A Bilingual, Multitask Benchmark for Long Context Understandingcited by 1,417
- 2021Are NLP Models really able to Solve Simple Math Word Problems?cited by 878
- 2022PAL: Program-aided Language Modelscited by 652
17 more
- 2023Scalable Extraction of Training Data from (Production) Language Modelscited by 434
- 2023Detecting Pretraining Data from Large Language Modelscited by 387
- 2021A Diverse Corpus for Evaluating and Developing English Math Word Problem Solverscited by 318
- 2022Data Contamination: From Memorization to Exploitationcited by 236
- 2023Proving Test Set Contamination in Black Box Language Modelscited by 230
- 2023Benchmarking Foundation Models with Language-Model-as-an-Examinercited by 172
- 2024Benchmarking Benchmark Leakage in Large Language Modelscited by 106
- 2023DyVal: Dynamic Evaluation of Large Language Models for Reasoning Taskscited by 101
- 2023KoLA: Carefully Benchmarking World Knowledge of Large Language Modelscited by 85
- 2024Benchmark Self-Evolving: A Multi-Agent Framework for Dynamic LLM Evaluationcited by 75
- 2021Memorization vs. Generalization: Quantifying Data Leakage in NLP Performance Evaluationcited by 70
- 2023LatestEval: Addressing Data Contamination in Language Model Evaluation through Dynamic and Time-Sensitive Test Constructioncited by 58
- 2023"According to ...": Prompting Language Models Improves Quoting from Pre-Training Datacited by 42
- 2024KIEval: A Knowledge-grounded Interactive Evaluation Framework for Large Language Modelscited by 36
- 2024Evading Data Contamination Detection for Language Models is (too) Easycited by 30
- 2024TRUCE: Private Benchmarking to Prevent Contamination and Improve Comparative Evaluation of LLMscited by 24
- 2023CLEAN-EVAL: Clean Evaluation on Contaminated Large Language Modelscited by 13
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2024: 1; 2025: 7; 2026: 3.
11 papers.
- 2025Recent Advances in Large Langauge Model Benchmarks against Data Contamination: From Static to Dynamic Evaluationcited by 38
- 2025A Survey on Data Contamination for Large Language Modelscited by 35
- 2024Detecting Training Data of Large Language Models via Expectation Maximizationcited by 13
- 2025On The Fragility of Benchmark Contamination Detection in Reasoning Modelscited by 9
- 2025VeriEquivBench: An Equivalence Score for Ground-Truth-Free Evaluation of Formally Verifiable Codecited by 7
- 2026Self-Improvement of Large Language Models: A Technical Overview and Future Outlookcited by 5
- 2025Establishing Trustworthy LLM Evaluation via Shortcut Neuron Analysiscited by 3
- 2026The Illusion of Reasoning: Exposing Evasive Data Contamination in LLMs via Zero-CoT Truncationcited by 3
- 2025LogitTrace: Detecting Benchmark Contamination via Layerwise Logit Trajectoriescited by 2
- 2025AdEval: Alignment-based Dynamic Evaluation to Mitigate Data Contamination in Large Language Modelscited by 1
- 2026Benchmark Contamination: A Taxonomy Organized by Defeated Mitigationcited by 0
- 2026Benchmark Contamination: A Taxonomy Organized by Defeated Mitigation29 Aug 2026
- 2026The Illusion of Reasoning: Exposing Evasive Data Contamination in LLMs via Zero-CoT Truncation21 May 2026
- 2026Self-Improvement of Large Language Models: A Technical Overview and Future Outlook26 Mar 2026
- 2025VeriEquivBench: An Equivalence Score for Ground-Truth-Free Evaluation of Formally Verifiable Code7 Oct 2025
- 2025On The Fragility of Benchmark Contamination Detection in Reasoning Models30 Sep 2025
- 2025LogitTrace: Detecting Benchmark Contamination via Layerwise Logit Trajectories25 Sep 2025
- 2025Establishing Trustworthy LLM Evaluation via Shortcut Neuron Analysis4 Jun 2025
- 2025Recent Advances in Large Langauge Model Benchmarks against Data Contamination: From Static to Dynamic Evaluation23 Feb 2025
- 2025A Survey on Data Contamination for Large Language Models20 Feb 2025
- 2025AdEval: Alignment-based Dynamic Evaluation to Mitigate Data Contamination in Large Language Models23 Jan 2025
- 2024Detecting Training Data of Large Language Models via Expectation Maximization10 Oct 2024
Similar, not cited
Close in wording, no citation either way
- 2024Does Data Contamination Detection Work (Well) for LLMs? A Survey and Evaluation on Detection Assumptions
- 2025Do LLMs Overthink Basic Math Reasoning? Benchmarking the Accuracy-Efficiency Tradeoff in Language Models
- 2026How reliable are LLMs when it comes to playing dice?
- 2024Exposing the Achilles' Heel: Evaluating LLMs Ability to Handle Mistakes in Mathematical Reasoning
- 2026Improving Mathematical Reasoning Capabilities in Large Language Models via Reasoning Process Error Classification
- 2025DeepDistill: Enhancing LLM Reasoning Capabilities via Large-Scale Difficulty-Graded Data Training
- 2025Rethinking Fine-Tuning when Scaling Test-Time Compute: Limiting Confidence Improves Mathematical Reasoning
- 2025BeyondBench: Contamination-Resistant Evaluation of Reasoning in Language Models