# Memorization Diagnostics for Code LLMs Should be Scale-Aware

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2608.12771 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2608.12771/

## Key facts

- No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Builds on 45 of its 52 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 13 Aug 2026.

## Builds on (most cited first, 30 of 45)

- [Attention Is All You Need](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1706.03762/) (2017)
- [Language Models are Few-Shot Learners](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2005.14165/) (2020)
- [Exploring the Limits of Transfer Learning with a Unified Text-to-Text Transformer](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1910.10683/) (2019)
- [Evaluating Large Language Models Trained on Code](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2107.03374/) (2021)
- [Scaling Laws for Neural Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2001.08361/) (2020)
- [Program Synthesis with Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2108.07732/) (2021)
- [SWE-bench: Can Language Models Resolve Real-World GitHub Issues?](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2310.06770/) (2023)
- [GPQA: A Graduate-Level Google-Proof Q&A Benchmark](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2311.12022/) (2023)
- [Emergent Abilities of Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2206.07682/) (2022)
- [The Pile: An 800GB Dataset of Diverse Text for Language Modeling](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2101.00027/) (2020)
- [Extracting Training Data from Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2012.07805/) (2020)
- [LiveCodeBench: Holistic and Contamination Free Evaluation of Large Language Models for Code](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2403.07974/) (2024)
- [Pythia: A Suite for Analyzing Large Language Models Across Training and Scaling](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2304.01373/) (2023)
- [Is Your Code Generated by ChatGPT Really Correct? Rigorous Evaluation of Large Language Models for Code Generation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2305.01210/) (2023)
- [Progress measures for grokking via mechanistic interpretability](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2301.05217/) (2023)
- [How Contextual are Contextualized Word Representations? Comparing the Geometry of BERT, ELMo, and GPT-2 Embeddings](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1909.00512/) (2019)
- [Deduplicating Training Data Makes Language Models Better](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2107.06499/) (2021)
- [Grokking: Generalization Beyond Overfitting on Small Algorithmic Datasets](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2201.02177/) (2022)
- [Detecting Pretraining Data from Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2310.16789/) (2023)
- [NLP Evaluation in trouble: On the Need to Measure LLM Data Contamination for each Benchmark](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2310.18018/) (2023)
- [Studying Large Language Model Generalization with Influence Functions](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2308.03296/) (2023)
- [Membership Inference Attacks against Language Models via Neighbourhood Comparison](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2305.18462/) (2023)
- [Towards Understanding Grokking: An Effective Theory of Representation Learning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2205.10343/) (2022)
- [Proving Test Set Contamination in Black Box Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2310.17623/) (2023)
- [Memorization Without Overfitting: Analyzing the Training Dynamics of Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2205.10770/) (2022)
- [ARC-AGI-2: A New Challenge for Frontier AI Reasoning Systems](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2505.11831/) (2025)
- [Emergent and Predictable Memorization in Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2304.11158/) (2023)
- [ARC Prize 2024: Technical Report](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2412.04604/) (2024)
- [ReCode: Robustness Evaluation of Code Generation Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2212.10264/) (2022)
- [SWE-bench Goes Live!](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2505.23419/) (2025)

## Abstract (arXiv)

The extent to which large language models for code rely on memorization over genuine understanding remains highly debated. While current literature frequently reports widespread memorization, evaluating the underlying probing techniques across dense architectures reveals a severe breakdown in their utility at scale. Traditional encoder-style probes using perturbations such as synonym fuzzing or dead-code insertion struggle to expose memorization in scaled models, even on known-contaminated benchmarks, and decoder-style probes that rely on log probabilities show similar performance degradation. The specific mode of failure for these probes, particularly why such techniques disrupt smaller models but fail to impact larger ones, motivates us to untangle representation load from memorization rather than treating them as a single phenomenon. By applying invertible mathematical transforms to numeric problems, we isolate these two factors and reveal that scaled encoders successfully absorb substantial representation load while still converging on the correct family of solutions. In practical software engineering, this ability to adapt to varying surface forms is what truly matters for usability and generalizability in LLM and agentic applications. Whether a specific solution was seen during training becomes a much less pressing question because although memorization inflates scores on contaminated benchmarks, factoring out representation load makes it debatable how much we should truly care if a functional answer was originally memorized. Future evaluations must therefore be built around separating these phenomena rather than relying on methodologies that quietly entangle them.