Are Large Language Models Memorizing Bug Benchmarks?
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
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 n-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.
Key facts. Cited by 11 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 30 of its 39 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 20 Nov 2024.
Builds on
30 of 39 references.
References · 30
- 2023LLaMA: Open and Efficient Foundation Language Modelscited by 13,958
- 2021Evaluating Large Language Models Trained on Codecited by 8,053
- 2020Measuring Massive Multitask Language Understandingcited by 7,768
- 2016SQuAD: 100,000+ Questions for Machine Comprehension of Textcited by 4,115
- 2021Program Synthesis with Large Language Modelscited by 3,509
- 2023SWE-bench: Can Language Models Resolve Real-World GitHub Issues?cited by 3,193
- 2023Mistral 7Bcited by 3,065
- 2023Code Llama: Open Foundation Models for Codecited by 2,105
- 2024Gemma 2: Improving Open Language Models at a Practical Sizecited by 1,928
- 2024LiveCodeBench: Holistic and Contamination Free Evaluation of Large Language Models for Codecited by 1,906
- 2024OpenHands: An Open Platform for AI Software Developers as Generalist Agentscited by 956
- 2021Measuring Coding Challenge Competence With APPScited by 879
18 more
- 2022CodeGen: An Open Large Language Model for Code with Multi-Turn Program Synthesiscited by 876
- 2023An Empirical Study of Catastrophic Forgetting in Large Language Models During Continual Fine-tuningcited by 622
- 2024StarCoder 2 and The Stack v2: The Next Generationcited by 484
- 2024Agentless: Demystifying LLM-based Software Engineering Agentscited by 400
- 2023Detecting Pretraining Data from Large Language Modelscited by 375
- 2022The Stack: 3 TB of permissively licensed source codecited by 354
- 2022Memorization Without Overfitting: Analyzing the Training Dynamics of Large Language Modelscited by 218
- 2024CodeGemma: Open Code Models Based on Gemmacited by 145
- 2024Benchmarking Benchmark Leakage in Large Language Modelscited by 102
- 2024SWE-Bench+: Enhanced Coding Benchmark for LLMscited by 95
- 2023Large Language Models for Test-Free Fault Localizationcited by 67
- 2022Leakage and the Reproducibility Crisis in ML-based Sciencecited by 63
- 2023RepairLLaMA: Efficient Representations and Fine-Tuned Adapters for Program Repaircited by 50
- 2023Estimating Contamination via Perplexity: Quantifying Memorisation in Language Model Evaluationcited by 47
- 2024Large Language Model for Vulnerability Detection: Emerging Results and Future Directionscited by 44
- 2024BugsInPy: A Database of Existing Bugs in Python Programs to Enable Controlled Testing and Debugging Studiescited by 35
- 2024Concerned with Data Contamination? Assessing Countermeasures in Code Language Modelcited by 14
- 2024GitBug-Java: A Reproducible Benchmark of Recent Java Bugscited by 13
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2025: 7; 2026: 4.
11 papers.
- 2025The SWE-Bench Illusion: When State-of-the-Art LLMs Remember Instead of Reasoncited by 47
- 2025Do LLMs Consider Security? An Empirical Study on Responses to Programming Questionscited by 8
- 2025The Art of Repair: Optimizing Iterative Program Repair with Instruction-Tuned Modelscited by 7
- 2025Assessing the Impact of Code Changes on the Fault Localizability of Large Language Modelscited by 4
- 2025DynaFix: Iterative Automated Program Repair Driven by Execution-Level Dynamic Informationcited by 3
- 2025SnipGen: A Mining Repository Framework for Evaluating LLMs for Codecited by 1
- 2026Rethinking Automated Program Repair: The Impact of Bug Complexity, Fault Localization, and LLM Cost-efficiencycited by 1
- 2025Contamination Means Overestimation? A Fine-Grained Empirical Study in Code Intelligencecited by 0
- 2026Fine-grained Approaches for Confidence Calibration of LLMs in Automated Code Revisioncited by 0
- 2026A Metamorphic Testing Approach to Diagnosing Memorization in LLM-Based Program Repaircited by 0
- 2026PatchBench: Evaluating AI Agents for Vulnerability Patchingcited by 0
- 2026PatchBench: Evaluating AI Agents for Vulnerability Patching3 Sep 2026
- 2026Rethinking Automated Program Repair: The Impact of Bug Complexity, Fault Localization, and LLM Cost-efficiency14 Aug 2026
- 2026A Metamorphic Testing Approach to Diagnosing Memorization in LLM-Based Program Repair23 Apr 2026
- 2026Fine-grained Approaches for Confidence Calibration of LLMs in Automated Code Revision8 Apr 2026
- 2025DynaFix: Iterative Automated Program Repair Driven by Execution-Level Dynamic Information31 Dec 2025
- 2025The SWE-Bench Illusion: When State-of-the-Art LLMs Remember Instead of Reason14 Jun 2025
- 2025Contamination Means Overestimation? A Fine-Grained Empirical Study in Code Intelligence3 Jun 2025
- 2025The Art of Repair: Optimizing Iterative Program Repair with Instruction-Tuned Models5 May 2025
- 2025Assessing the Impact of Code Changes on the Fault Localizability of Large Language Models6 Apr 2025
- 2025Do LLMs Consider Security? An Empirical Study on Responses to Programming Questions20 Feb 2025
- 2025SnipGen: A Mining Repository Framework for Evaluating LLMs for Code10 Feb 2025