An Empirical Study of LLM-Based Code Clone Detection

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2511.01176v1
• Date: Mon, 03 Nov 2025 03:00:42 GMT
• Title: An Empirical Study of LLM-Based Code Clone Detection
• Authors: Wenqing Zhu, Norihiro Yoshida, Eunjong Choi, Yutaka Matsubara, Hiroaki Takada,
• Abstract summary: We show that large language models (LLMs) can achieve comparable performance across different datasets.<n>Most models achieved a high response consistency, with over 90% of judgments remaining consistent across all five submissions.
• Score: 4.393136571408381
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/
• Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) have demonstrated remarkable capabilities in various software engineering tasks, such as code generation and debugging, because of their ability to translate between programming languages and natural languages. Existing studies have demonstrated the effectiveness of LLMs in code clone detection. However, two crucial issues remain unaddressed: the ability of LLMs to achieve comparable performance across different datasets and the consistency of LLMs' responses in code clone detection. To address these issues, we constructed seven code clone datasets and then evaluated five LLMs in four existing prompts with these datasets. The datasets were created by sampling code pairs using their Levenshtein ratio from two different code collections, CodeNet and BigCloneBench. Our evaluation revealed that although LLMs perform well in CodeNet-related datasets, with o3-mini achieving a 0.943 F1 score, their performance significantly decreased in BigCloneBench-related datasets. Most models achieved a high response consistency, with over 90\% of judgments remaining consistent across all five submissions. The fluctuations of the F1 score affected by inconsistency are also tiny; their variations are less than 0.03.

Related papers

• Narrowing the Complexity Gap in the Evaluation of Large Language Models [7.915455233884959]
  evaluating Large Language Models (LLMs) with respect to real-world code complexity is essential.<n>We propose GeneBench, an automated technique to add real-world complexities to any programming benchmark.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-02-21T18:39:06Z)
• Enhancing LLM-Based Code Generation with Complexity Metrics: A Feedback-Driven Approach [6.289275189295223]
  We investigate the relationship between code complexity and the success of Large Language Models generated code.<n>We propose an iterative feedback method, where LLMs are prompted to generate correct code based on complexity metrics from previous failed outputs.<n>Experiment results show that our approach makes notable improvements, particularly with a smaller LLM.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-05-29T19:06:14Z)
• OpenCodeInstruct: A Large-scale Instruction Tuning Dataset for Code LLMs [62.68905180014956]
  We introduce OpenCodeInstruct, the largest open-access instruction tuning dataset, comprising 5 million diverse samples.<n>Each sample includes a programming question, solution, test cases, execution feedback, and LLM-generated quality assessments.<n>We fine-tune various base models, including LLaMA and Qwen, across multiple scales (1B+, 3B+, and 7B+) using our dataset.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-04-05T02:52:16Z)
• LLM2: Let Large Language Models Harness System 2 Reasoning [65.89293674479907]
  Large language models (LLMs) have exhibited impressive capabilities across a myriad of tasks, yet they occasionally yield undesirable outputs.<n>We introduce LLM2, a novel framework that combines an LLM with a process-based verifier.<n>LLMs2 is responsible for generating plausible candidates, while the verifier provides timely process-based feedback to distinguish desirable and undesirable outputs.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-12-29T06:32:36Z)
• The Struggles of LLMs in Cross-lingual Code Clone Detection [3.5202378300682162]
  Cross-lingual code clone detection has gained traction within the software engineering community.<n>Inspired by the significant advances in machine learning, this paper revisits cross-lingual code clone detection.<n>We evaluate the performance of five (05) Large Language Models (LLMs) and eight prompts (08) for the identification of cross-lingual code clones.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-08-08T12:57:14Z)
• What's Wrong with Your Code Generated by Large Language Models? An Extensive Study [92.62952504133926]
  This study evaluated the performance of three leading closed-source LLMs and six popular open-source LLMs on three commonly used benchmarks.<n>We developed a taxonomy of bugs for incorrect codes and analyzed the root cause for common bug types.<n>We propose a novel training-free iterative method that introduces self-critique, enabling LLMs to critique and correct their generated code.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-07-08T17:27:17Z)
• Assessing the Code Clone Detection Capability of Large Language Models [0.0]
  The evaluation involves testing the models on a variety of code pairs of different clone types and levels of similarity. Findings indicate that GPT-4 consistently surpasses GPT-3.5 across all clone types.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-07-02T16:20:44Z)
• Applying RLAIF for Code Generation with API-usage in Lightweight LLMs [15.366324461797582]
  Reinforcement Learning from AI Feedback (RLAIF) has demonstrated significant potential across various domains. This paper introduces an RLAIF framework for improving the code generation abilities of lightweight (1B parameters) LLMs.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-28T17:16:03Z)
• 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)
• Genixer: Empowering Multimodal Large Language Models as a Powerful Data Generator [63.762209407570715]
  Genixer is a comprehensive data generation pipeline consisting of four key steps. A synthetic VQA-like dataset trained with LLaVA1.5 enhances performance on 10 out of 12 multimodal benchmarks. MLLMs trained with task-specific datasets can surpass GPT-4V in generating complex instruction tuning data.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-12-11T09:44:41Z)
• ML-Bench: Evaluating Large Language Models and Agents for Machine Learning Tasks on Repository-Level Code [76.84199699772903]
  ML-Bench is a benchmark rooted in real-world programming applications that leverage existing code repositories to perform tasks. To evaluate both Large Language Models (LLMs) and AI agents, two setups are employed: ML-LLM-Bench for assessing LLMs' text-to-code conversion within a predefined deployment environment, and ML-Agent-Bench for testing autonomous agents in an end-to-end task execution within a Linux sandbox environment.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-11-16T12:03:21Z)
• Large Language Model-Aware In-Context Learning for Code Generation [75.68709482932903]
  Large language models (LLMs) have shown impressive in-context learning (ICL) ability in code generation. We propose a novel learning-based selection approach named LAIL (LLM-Aware In-context Learning) for code generation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-10-15T06:12:58Z)
• Lost in Translation: A Study of Bugs Introduced by Large Language Models while Translating Code [5.915447908295047]
  We present a large-scale empirical study to investigate the ability of general LLMs and code LLMs for code translation. Our study involves the translation of 1,700 code samples from three benchmarks and two real-world projects. We find that correct translations range from 2.1% to 47.3% for the studied LLMs.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-08-06T13:33:13Z)
• LLM-Pruner: On the Structural Pruning of Large Language Models [65.02607075556742]
  Large language models (LLMs) have shown remarkable capabilities in language understanding and generation. We tackle the compression of LLMs within the bound of two constraints: being task-agnostic and minimizing the reliance on the original training dataset. Our method, named LLM-Pruner, adopts structural pruning that selectively removes non-critical coupled structures.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-05-19T12:10:53Z)

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.