CodeFlowLM: Incremental Just-In-Time Defect Prediction with Pretrained Language Models and Exploratory Insights into Defect Localization
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
This work introduces CodeFlowLM, an incremental learning framework for Just-In-Time Software Defect Prediction (JIT-SDP) that leverages pre-trained language models (PLMs). Unlike traditional online learners, CodeFlowLM employs continual fine-tuning to address concept drift, class imbalance, and verification latency without retraining from scratch. We evaluated encoder-only and encoder-decoder PLMs (notably CodeT5+ and UniXCoder) in JIT-SDP scenarios within and between projects, comparing them with the incremental baseline BORB. The results show that CodeFlowLM achieves up to 68% G-Mean gains, confirming its superior adaptability and robustness in evolving software environments. We further extend the analysis to Just-in-Time Defect Localization (JIT-DL), benchmarking Large Language Models (LLMs) such as GPT-5, Claude Sonnet 4.5, and Gemini 2.5 Pro against attention-based models. GPT-5 delivers comparable performance for Recall@20% and Effort@20% with higher stability, although attention-based methods retain an advantage in fine-grained ranking metrics (Top-k, IFA). A qualitative error analysis reveals that most false positives arise from (1) human-like conservative bias, (2) insufficient contextual information in diff-based prompts, and (3) potential dataset mislabeling in JIT-Defects4J. These findings highlight both the promise and the current limitations of LLM reasoning in defect localization. False negatives occur in smaller proportions. Overall, CodeFlowLM significantly advances the state of the art in incremental JIT-SDP, demonstrating superior adaptability and robustness in evolving software environments. Furthermore, our exploratory analysis of LLMs in JIT-DL not only benchmarks their performance against established attention-based models but also provides critical insights into the current limitations of prompt-based defect reasoning.
Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 19 of its 49 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 28 Nov 2025.
Builds on
19 of 49 references.
References · 19
- 2017Attention Is All You Needcited by 60,361
- 2018BERT: Pre-training of Deep Bidirectional Transformers for Language Understandingcited by 40,399
- 2019RoBERTa: A Robustly Optimized BERT Pretraining Approachcited by 13,372
- 2016"Why Should I Trust You?": Explaining the Predictions of Any Classifiercited by 5,070
- 2019Parameter-Efficient Transfer Learning for NLPcited by 4,236
- 2025Gemini 2.5: Pushing the Frontier with Advanced Reasoning, Multimodality, Long Context, and Next Generation Agentic Capabilitiescited by 3,796
- 2020CodeBERT: A Pre-Trained Model for Programming and Natural Languagescited by 1,310
- 2021CodeXGLUE: A Machine Learning Benchmark Dataset for Code Understanding and Generationcited by 744
- 2020GraphCodeBERT: Pre-training Code Representations with Data Flowcited by 609
- 2022UniXcoder: Unified Cross-Modal Pre-training for Code Representationcited by 361
- 2020CC2Vec: Distributed Representations of Code Changescited by 39
- 2024A Deep Dive into Large Language Models for Automated Bug Localization and Repaircited by 39
7 more
- 2023Large Language Models in Fault Localisationcited by 28
- 2021JITLine: A Simpler, Better, Faster, Finer-grained Just-In-Time Defect Predictioncited by 15
- 2020A Fine-grained Data Set and Analysis of Tangling in Bug Fixing Commitscited by 11
- 2024Delving into Parameter-Efficient Fine-Tuning in Code Change Learning: An Empirical Studycited by 8
- 2023A study on the impact of pre-trained model on Just-In-Time defect predictioncited by 3
- 2024Bridging Expert Knowledge with Deep Learning Techniques for Just-In-Time Defect Predictioncited by 2
- 2024An Empirical Study on JIT Defect Prediction Based on BERT-style Modelcited by 2
Built on by
Not cited yet.
Similar, not cited
Close in wording, no citation either way
- 2025Exploring the Potential and Limitations of Large Language Models for Novice Program Fault Localization ↗
- 2025Large Language Models for Fault Localization: An Empirical Study ↗
- 2025Assessing the Impact of Code Changes on the Fault Localizability of Large Language Models
- 2025LLM-Based Detection of Tangled Code Changes for Higher-Quality Method-Level Bug Datasets
- 2025FeedbackEval: A Benchmark for Evaluating Large Language Models in Feedback-Driven Code Repair Tasks
- 2025Mechanistic Interpretability of Code Correctness in LLMs via Sparse Autoencoders
- 2025Enhancing LLM-based Fault Localization with a Functionality-Aware Retrieval-Augmented Generation Framework ↗
- 2026ConceptCoder: Improve Code Reasoning via Concept Learning