Dynamic Benchmarking of Reasoning Capabilities in Code Large Language Models Under Data Contamination

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2503.04149v1
• Date: Thu, 06 Mar 2025 06:56:59 GMT
• Title: Dynamic Benchmarking of Reasoning Capabilities in Code Large Language Models Under Data Contamination
• Authors: Simin Chen, Pranav Pusarla, Baishakhi Ray,
• Abstract summary: We propose tool, a novel benchmarking suite for evaluating Code LLMs under potential data contamination.<n>tool employs multiple agents to extract and modify the context without altering the core logic, generating semantically equivalent variations.<n>Results show that tool effectively benchmarks reasoning capabilities under contamination risks while generating diverse problem sets to ensure consistent and reliable evaluations.
• Score: 18.006532081289627
• License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
• Abstract: The rapid evolution of code largelanguage models underscores the need for effective and transparent benchmarking of their reasoning capabilities. However, the current benchmarking approach heavily depends on publicly available, human-created datasets. The widespread use of these fixed benchmark datasets makes the benchmarking process to be static and thus particularly susceptible to data contamination, an unavoidable consequence of the extensive data collection processes used to train Code LLMs. Existing approaches that address data contamination often suffer from human effort limitations and imbalanced problem complexity. To tackle these challenges, we propose \tool, a novel benchmarking suite for evaluating Code LLMs under potential data contamination. Given a seed programming problem, \tool employs multiple agents to extract and modify the context without altering the core logic, generating semantically equivalent variations. We introduce a dynamic data generation methods and conduct empirical studies on two seed datasets across 21 Code LLMs. Results show that \tool effectively benchmarks reasoning capabilities under contamination risks while generating diverse problem sets to ensure consistent and reliable evaluations.

Related papers

• Towards Robust Universal Information Extraction: Benchmark, Evaluation, and Solution [66.11004226578771]
  Existing robust benchmark datasets have two key limitations. They generate only a limited range of perturbations for a single Information Extraction (IE) task. Considering the powerful generation capabilities of Large Language Models (LLMs), we introduce a new benchmark dataset for Robust UIE, called RUIE-Bench. We show that training with only textbf15% of the data leads to an average textbf7.5% relative performance improvement across three IE tasks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-03-05T05:39:29Z)
• Recent Advances in Large Langauge Model Benchmarks against Data Contamination: From Static to Dynamic Evaluation [48.21783789732205]
  We conduct an in-depth analysis of existing static to dynamic benchmarking methods aimed at reducing data contamination risks. We propose a series of optimal design principles for dynamic benchmarking and analyze the limitations of existing dynamic benchmarks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-02-23T08:18:37Z)
• A Survey on Data Contamination for Large Language Models [12.431575579432458]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) have demonstrated significant progress in various areas, such as text generation and code synthesis.<n>The reliability of performance evaluation has come under scrutiny due to data contamination.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-02-20T10:23:27Z)
• SIaM: Self-Improving Code-Assisted Mathematical Reasoning of Large Language Models [54.78329741186446]
  We propose a novel paradigm that uses a code-based critic model to guide steps including question-code data construction, quality control, and complementary evaluation. Experiments across both in-domain and out-of-domain benchmarks in English and Chinese demonstrate the effectiveness of the proposed paradigm.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-08-28T06:33:03Z)
• DARG: Dynamic Evaluation of Large Language Models via Adaptive Reasoning Graph [70.79413606968814]
  We introduce Dynamic Evaluation of LLMs via Adaptive Reasoning Graph Evolvement (DARG) to dynamically extend current benchmarks with controlled complexity and diversity. Specifically, we first extract the reasoning graphs of data points in current benchmarks and then perturb the reasoning graphs to generate novel testing data. Such newly generated test samples can have different levels of complexity while maintaining linguistic diversity similar to the original benchmarks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-25T04:27:53Z)
• Unveiling the Flaws: Exploring Imperfections in Synthetic Data and Mitigation Strategies for Large Language Models [89.88010750772413]
  Synthetic data has been proposed as a solution to address the issue of high-quality data scarcity in the training of large language models (LLMs) Our work delves into these specific flaws associated with question-answer (Q-A) pairs, a prevalent type of synthetic data, and presents a method based on unlearning techniques to mitigate these flaws. Our work has yielded key insights into the effective use of synthetic data, aiming to promote more robust and efficient LLM training.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-18T08:38:59Z)
• Quantifying Contamination in Evaluating Code Generation Capabilities of Language Models [27.24738197172374]
  Large language models have achieved remarkable performance on various code generation benchmarks. There have been growing concerns regarding potential contamination of these benchmarks as they may be leaked into pretraining and finetuning data. We show that there are substantial overlap between popular code generation benchmarks and open training corpus, and models perform significantly better on the subset of the benchmarks where similar solutions are seen during training.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-03-06T21:45:35Z)
• Automating Dataset Updates Towards Reliable and Timely Evaluation of Large Language Models [81.27391252152199]
  Large language models (LLMs) have achieved impressive performance across various natural language benchmarks. We propose to automate dataset updating and provide systematic analysis regarding its effectiveness. There are two updating strategies: 1) mimicking strategy to generate similar samples based on original data, and 2) extending strategy that further expands existing samples.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-02-19T07:15:59Z)
• Rethinking Benchmark and Contamination for Language Models with Rephrased Samples [49.18977581962162]
  Large language models are increasingly trained on all the data ever produced by humans. Many have raised concerns about the trustworthiness of public benchmarks due to potential contamination in pre-training or fine-tuning datasets.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-11-08T17:35:20Z)
• Data Contamination Through the Lens of Time [21.933771085956426]
  Large language models (LLMs) are often supported by evaluating publicly available benchmarks. This practice raises concerns of data contamination, i.e., evaluating on examples that are explicitly or implicitly included in the training data. We conduct the first thorough longitudinal analysis of data contamination in LLMs by using the natural experiment of training cutoffs in GPT models.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-10-16T17:51:29Z)
• Revisit Input Perturbation Problems for LLMs: A Unified Robustness Evaluation Framework for Noisy Slot Filling Task [18.623619585980688]
  We propose a unified robustness evaluation framework based on the slot-filling task to evaluate the dialogue understanding capability of large language models. Specifically, we construct a input perturbation evaluation dataset, Noise-LLM, which contains five types of single perturbation and four types of mixed perturbation data. Our aim is to assess how well various robustness methods of LLMs perform in real-world noisy scenarios.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-10-10T10:22:05Z)

This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.

This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.