LLMs taking shortcuts in test generation: A study with SAP HANA and LevelDB
- URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.14437v1
- Date: Wed, 15 Apr 2026 21:30:02 GMT
- Title: LLMs taking shortcuts in test generation: A study with SAP HANA and LevelDB
- Abstract summary: Large Language Models (LLMs) have achieved impressive results on public benchmarks, often leading to claims of advanced reasoning.<n>This paper investigates behavior in automated test generation for software memorization, contrasting performance on an open-source system.<n>Results show that LLMs excel on familiar, open-source benchmarks but struggle with unseen, complex, often prioritizing compilability over effectiveness.
- Score: 0.22940141855172033
- License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/
- Abstract: Large Language Models (LLMs) have achieved impressive results on public benchmarks, often leading to claims of advanced reasoning and understanding. However, recent research in cognitive science reveals that these models sometimes rely on shallow heuristics and memorization, taking shortcuts rather than demonstrating genuine cognitive abilities. This paper investigates LLM behavior in automated test generation for software, contrasting performance on an open-source system (LevelDB) with SAP HANA, one of the most widely deployed commercial database systems worldwide, whose proprietary codebase is guaranteed to be absent from training data. We combine cognitive evaluation principles, drawing on Mitchell's mechanism-focused assessment methodology, with empirical software testing, employing mutation score and iterative compiler-feedback repair loops to assess both accuracy and underlying reasoning strategies. Results show that LLMs excel on familiar, open-source benchmarks but struggle with unseen, complex domains, often prioritizing compilability over semantic effectiveness. These findings provide independent software engineering evidence for the broader claim that current LLMs lack robust reasoning, and highlight the need for evaluation frameworks that penalize trivial shortcuts and reward true generalization.
Related papers
- PROBE: Benchmarking Code Generation in Large Language Models [0.8921166277011344]
Large Language Models (LLMs) are increasingly being used in everyday software engineering tasks.<n>LLMs are far from perfect, making evaluation essential to understand their strengths and limitations.<n>We introduce PROBE, a benchmark framework that establishes a systematic structure built on diverse and well-defined metrics.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2026-07-15T13:28:18Z) - Evaluating the Formal Reasoning Capabilities of Large Language Models through Chomsky Hierarchy [62.32144504442516]
It is unknown whether SOTA LLMs can grasp the structured, hierarchical complexity of formal languages.<n>ChomskyBench is a benchmark for systematically evaluating LLMs through the lens of Chomsky Hierarchy.<n>ChomskyBench is composed of a comprehensive suite of language recognition and generation tasks designed to test capabilities at each level.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2026-04-03T04:06:39Z) - SelfAI: Building a Self-Training AI System with LLM Agents [79.10991818561907]
SelfAI is a general multi-agent platform that combines a User Agent for translating high-level research objectives into standardized experimental configurations.<n>An Experiment Manager orchestrates parallel, fault-tolerant training across heterogeneous hardware while maintaining a structured knowledge base for continuous feedback.<n>Across regression, computer vision, scientific computing, medical imaging, and drug discovery benchmarks, SelfAI consistently achieves strong performance and reduces redundant trials.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2025-11-29T09:18:39Z) - Toward Automated and Trustworthy Scientific Analysis and Visualization with LLM-Generated Code [6.068120728706316]
Large language models (LLMs) offer a promising solution by generating code from natural language descriptions.<n>We construct a benchmark suite of domain-inspired prompts that reflect real-world research tasks.<n>Our findings show that, without human intervention, the reliability of LLM-generated code is limited.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2025-11-26T21:27:03Z) - Beyond Synthetic Benchmarks: Evaluating LLM Performance on Real-World Class-Level Code Generation [3.9189409002585567]
Large language models (LLMs) have demonstrated strong performance on function-level code generation benchmarks.<n>We introduce a benchmark derived from real-world open-source repositories to evaluate generalization under practical conditions.<n>We examine how input specification completeness and retrieval-augmented generation affect class-level correctness across multiple state-of-the-art LLMs.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2025-10-30T04:30:23Z) - OpenUnlearning: Accelerating LLM Unlearning via Unified Benchmarking of Methods and Metrics [82.0813150432867]
We introduce OpenUnlearning, a standardized framework for benchmarking large language models (LLMs) unlearning methods and metrics.<n>OpenUnlearning integrates 13 unlearning algorithms and 16 diverse evaluations across 3 leading benchmarks.<n>We also benchmark diverse unlearning methods and provide a comparative analysis against an extensive evaluation suite.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2025-06-14T20:16:37Z) - IDA-Bench: Evaluating LLMs on Interactive Guided Data Analysis [60.32962597618861]
IDA-Bench is a novel benchmark evaluating large language models in multi-round interactive scenarios.<n>Agent performance is judged by comparing its final numerical output to the human-derived baseline.<n>Even state-of-the-art coding agents (like Claude-3.7-thinking) succeed on 50% of the tasks, highlighting limitations not evident in single-turn tests.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2025-05-23T09:37:52Z) - Larger Is Not Always Better: Exploring Small Open-source Language Models in Logging Statement Generation [33.501853395036534]
Large language models (LLMs) for automated logging statement generation present privacy and resource issues.<n>This paper presents the first large-scale empirical study evaluating small open-source language models (SOLMs) for automated logging statement generation.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2025-05-22T12:26:53Z) - The Vulnerability of Language Model Benchmarks: Do They Accurately Reflect True LLM Performance? [1.3810901729134184]
Large Language Models (LLMs) excel at standardized tests while failing to demonstrate genuine language understanding and adaptability.<n>Our systematic analysis of NLP evaluation frameworks reveals pervasive vulnerabilities across the evaluation spectrum.<n>We lay the groundwork for new evaluation methods that resist manipulation, minimize data contamination, and assess domain-specific tasks.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-12-02T20:49:21Z) - 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) - Can Long-Context Language Models Subsume Retrieval, RAG, SQL, and More? [54.667202878390526]
Long-context language models (LCLMs) have the potential to revolutionize our approach to tasks traditionally reliant on external tools like retrieval systems or databases.
We introduce LOFT, a benchmark of real-world tasks requiring context up to millions of tokens designed to evaluate LCLMs' performance on in-context retrieval and reasoning.
Our findings reveal LCLMs' surprising ability to rival state-of-the-art retrieval and RAG systems, despite never having been explicitly trained for these tasks.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-06-19T00:28:58Z) - LLMs for Relational Reasoning: How Far are We? [8.840750655261251]
Large language models (LLMs) have revolutionized many areas by achieving state-of-the-art performance on downstream tasks.
Recent efforts have demonstrated that the LLMs are poor at solving sequential decision-making problems.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-01-17T08:22:52Z) - MR-GSM8K: A Meta-Reasoning Benchmark for Large Language Model Evaluation [60.65820977963331]
We introduce a novel evaluation paradigm for Large Language Models (LLMs)
This paradigm shifts the emphasis from result-oriented assessments, which often neglect the reasoning process, to a more comprehensive evaluation.
By applying this paradigm in the GSM8K dataset, we have developed the MR-GSM8K benchmark.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2023-12-28T15:49:43Z)
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.