REVIEW 6 cited by
Concerned with Data Contamination? Assessing Countermeasures in Code Language Model
Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.
This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.
SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event
T0 review · schema-true
One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.
pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp
Concerned with Data Contamination? Assessing Countermeasures in Code Language Model
read the original abstract
Various techniques have been proposed to leverage the capabilities of code language models (CLMs) for SE tasks. While these techniques typically evaluate their effectiveness using publicly available datasets, the evaluation can be subject to data contamination threats where the evaluation datasets have already been used to train the concerned CLMs. This can significantly affect the reliability of the evaluation. Different countermeasures have been suggested to mitigate the data contamination threat. Countermeasures include using more recent data, curating new data, and refactoring existing data are introduced, yet it is unclear whether these countermeasures could really mitigate data contamination threats to model evaluation. To fill the gap, we systematically study to quantify the impacts of these countermeasures on CLMs' performance. To facilitate the study, we collected over 2 million Python functions with timestamps ranging from January 1st, 2018, to December 31st, 2023. The data created before the models' cut-off date are considered "contaminated data", while the data where the countermeasures are taken are regarded as "cleansed data". We study the impact of these countermeasures by investigating the difference in CLMs' performance on contaminated and cleansed data derived from different countermeasures. Our experiments yield several interesting observations. For instance, CLMs do not necessarily perform worse on data after the models' cut-off date; on the contrary, they sometimes perform better. In addition, refactoring did not always result in decreased performance; it could lead to improvements instead. Furthermore, existing metrics such as perplexity cannot distinguish contaminated/cleansed data. We hope that the results and observations could help deepen the understanding of CLMs' capabilities and inform the community about data contamination.
Forward citations
Cited by 6 Pith papers
-
MR-Coupler: Automated Metamorphic Test Generation via Functional Coupling Analysis
MR-Coupler leverages functional coupling analysis and LLMs to generate valid metamorphic test cases for over 90% of tasks while detecting 44% of real bugs, outperforming baselines by 64.90% in validity and 36.56% in f...
-
Pretraining Data Exposure in Large Language Models: A Survey of Membership Inference, Data Contamination, and Security Implications
First unified survey formalizing Pretraining Data Exposure across exposure levels and reviewing attack, defense, and contamination methods for LLMs.
-
iCoRe: An Iterative Correlation-Aware Retriever for Bug Reproduction Test Generation
iCoRe improves Fail-to-Pass rates to 42.0% and 52.8% on two bug reproduction benchmarks by using correlation-aware iterative retrieval instead of standard semantic or BM25 methods.
-
iCoRe: An Iterative Correlation-Aware Retriever for Bug Reproduction Test Generation
iCoRe improves bug reproduction test generation by combining differentiated code/test retrieval, function-call-structure similarity, and iterative generation-to-retrieval feedback, achieving state-of-the-art results o...
-
MR-Adopt: Automatic Deduction of Input Transformation Function for Metamorphic Testing
MR-Adopt deduces input transformations from hard-coded MR test cases using LLMs, data-flow refinement, and output-relation selection to enable reuse with new source inputs.
-
Benchmark Data Contamination of Large Language Models: A Survey
A survey reviewing benchmark data contamination in LLMs, its impact on evaluation, and alternative assessment approaches.
discussion (0)
Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.