An Empirical Study on the Capability of LLMs in Decomposing Bug Reports

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2504.20911v1
• Date: Tue, 29 Apr 2025 16:29:12 GMT
• Title: An Empirical Study on the Capability of LLMs in Decomposing Bug Reports
• Authors: Zhiyuan Chen, Vanessa Nava-Camal, Ahmad Suleiman, Yiming Tang, Daqing Hou, Weiyi Shang,
• Abstract summary: This study investigates whether large language models (LLMs) can assist developers in automatically decomposing complex bug reports into smaller, self-contained units.<n>We conducted an empirical study on 127 resolved privacy-related bug reports collected from Apache Jira.
• Score: 9.544728752295269
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: Background: Bug reports are essential to the software development life cycle. They help developers track and resolve issues, but are often difficult to process due to their complexity, which can delay resolution and affect software quality. Aims: This study investigates whether large language models (LLMs) can assist developers in automatically decomposing complex bug reports into smaller, self-contained units, making them easier to understand and address. Method: We conducted an empirical study on 127 resolved privacy-related bug reports collected from Apache Jira. We evaluated ChatGPT and DeepSeek using different prompting strategies. We first tested both LLMs with zero-shot prompts, then applied improved prompts with demonstrations (using few-shot prompting) to measure their abilities in bug decomposition. Results: Our findings show that LLMs are capable of decomposing bug reports, but their overall performance still requires further improvement and strongly depends on the quality of the prompts. With zero-shot prompts, both studied LLMs (ChatGPT and DeepSeek) performed poorly. After prompt tuning, ChatGPT's true decomposition rate increased by 140\% and DeepSeek's by 163.64\%. Conclusions: LLMs show potential in helping developers analyze and decompose complex bug reports, but they still need improvement in terms of accuracy and bug understanding.

Related papers

• Retrieval-Augmented Generation with Conflicting Evidence [57.66282463340297]
  Large language model (LLM) agents are increasingly employing retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) to improve the factuality of their responses. In practice, these systems often need to handle ambiguous user queries and potentially conflicting information from multiple sources. We propose RAMDocs (Retrieval with Ambiguity and Misinformation in Documents), a new dataset that simulates complex and realistic scenarios for conflicting evidence for a user query.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-04-17T16:46:11Z)
• LLPut: Investigating Large Language Models for Bug Report-Based Input Generation [0.0]
  Failure-inducing inputs play a crucial role in diagnosing and analyzing software bugs. Prior research has leveraged various Natural Language Processing (NLP) techniques for automated input extraction. With the advent of Large Language Models (LLMs), an important research question arises: how effectively can generative LLMs extract failure-inducing inputs from bug reports?
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-03-26T14:25:01Z)
• LLMs are Bug Replicators: An Empirical Study on LLMs' Capability in Completing Bug-prone Code [24.048639099281324]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) have demonstrated remarkable performance in code completion. This paper presents the first empirical study evaluating the performance of LLMs in completing bug-prone code.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-03-14T04:48:38Z)
• PATCH: Empowering Large Language Model with Programmer-Intent Guidance and Collaborative-Behavior Simulation for Automatic Bug Fixing [34.768989900184636]
  Bug fixing holds significant importance in software development and maintenance.<n>Recent research has made substantial strides in exploring the potential of large language models (LLMs) for automatically resolving software bugs.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-01-27T15:43:04Z)
• Harnessing Large Language Models for Knowledge Graph Question Answering via Adaptive Multi-Aspect Retrieval-Augmentation [81.18701211912779]
  We introduce an Adaptive Multi-Aspect Retrieval-augmented over KGs (Amar) framework.<n>This method retrieves knowledge including entities, relations, and subgraphs, and converts each piece of retrieved text into prompt embeddings.<n>Our method has achieved state-of-the-art performance on two common datasets.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-12-24T16:38:04Z)
• Grounding by Trying: LLMs with Reinforcement Learning-Enhanced Retrieval [55.63711219190506]
  Large language models (LLMs) often struggle with posing the right search queries. We introduce $underlineLe$arning to $underlineRe$trieve by $underlineT$rying (LeReT) LeReT can improve the absolute retrieval accuracy by up to 29% and the downstream generator evaluations by 17%.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-30T17:02:54Z)
• Achieving >97% on GSM8K: Deeply Understanding the Problems Makes LLMs Better Solvers for Math Word Problems [50.76385564061713]
  Chain-of-Thought (CoT) prompting has enhanced the performance of Large Language Models (LLMs) across various reasoning tasks.<n>CoT usually suffers from three pitfalls: semantic misunderstanding errors, calculation errors, and step-missing errors.<n>We propose Deeply Understanding the Problems (DUP) to improve the LLMs' math problem-solving ability by addressing semantic misunderstanding errors.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-04-23T12:16:05Z)
• DebugBench: Evaluating Debugging Capability of Large Language Models [80.73121177868357]
  DebugBench is a benchmark for Large Language Models (LLMs) It covers four major bug categories and 18 minor types in C++, Java, and Python. We evaluate two commercial and four open-source models in a zero-shot scenario.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-01-09T15:46:38Z)
• Look Before You Leap: A Universal Emergent Decomposition of Retrieval Tasks in Language Models [58.57279229066477]
  We study how language models (LMs) solve retrieval tasks in diverse situations. We introduce ORION, a collection of structured retrieval tasks spanning six domains. We find that LMs internally decompose retrieval tasks in a modular way.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-12-13T18:36:43Z)
• ReEval: Automatic Hallucination Evaluation for Retrieval-Augmented Large Language Models via Transferable Adversarial Attacks [91.55895047448249]
  This paper presents ReEval, an LLM-based framework using prompt chaining to perturb the original evidence for generating new test cases. We implement ReEval using ChatGPT and evaluate the resulting variants of two popular open-domain QA datasets. Our generated data is human-readable and useful to trigger hallucination in large language models.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-10-19T06:37:32Z)
• A Critical Review of Large Language Model on Software Engineering: An Example from ChatGPT and Automated Program Repair [19.123640635549524]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) have been gaining increasing attention and demonstrated promising performance across a variety of software engineering tasks. This paper reviews the bug-fixing capabilities of ChatGPT on a clean APR benchmark with different research objectives. ChatGPT is able to fix 109 out of 151 buggy programs using the basic prompt within 35 independent rounds, outperforming state-of-the-art LLMs CodeT5 and PLBART by 27.5% and 62.4% prediction accuracy.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-10-13T06:11:47Z)
• Statistical Knowledge Assessment for Large Language Models [79.07989821512128]
  Given varying prompts regarding a factoid question, can a large language model (LLM) reliably generate factually correct answers? We propose KaRR, a statistical approach to assess factual knowledge for LLMs. Our results reveal that the knowledge in LLMs with the same backbone architecture adheres to the scaling law, while tuning on instruction-following data sometimes compromises the model's capability to generate factually correct text reliably.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-05-17T18:54:37Z)
• Large Language Models are Few-shot Testers: Exploring LLM-based General Bug Reproduction [14.444294152595429]
  The number of tests added in open source repositories due to issues was about 28% of the corresponding project test suite size. We propose LIBRO, a framework that uses Large Language Models (LLMs), which have been shown to be capable of performing code-related tasks. Our evaluation of LIBRO shows that, on the widely studied Defects4J benchmark, LIBRO can generate failure reproducing test cases for 33% of all studied cases.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-09-23T10:50:47Z)

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.