The paper investigates whether code large language models (CodeLLMs) inadvertently reproduce proprietary or sensitive code by evaluating seven state‑of‑the‑art training data detection (TDD) methods on eight CodeLLMs. It introduces CodeSnitch, a benchmark of 9,000 function‑level code samples across three languages, each labeled as included or excluded from training data, and applies mutation strategies based on the Type‑1 to Type‑4 code clone taxonomy to test TDD robustness. The study offers a systematic assessment of current TDD techniques for code and suggests directions for developing more effective detection methods.
By Tianlin Li, Yunxiang Wei, Zhiming Li, Aishan Liu, Qing Guo, Xianglong Liu, Dongning Sun, Yang Liu
arXiv:2607. 14816v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Large Language Models (LLMs) perform differently on identical programming tasks when prompted in different natural languages, a phenomenon known as language bias.
By Saima Afrin, Alessandro Midolo, Camilo Escobar-Vel\'asquez, Mario Linares-V\'asquez, Weiyuan Ding, Bowen Xu, Massimiliano Di Penta, Antonio Mastropaolo
Large Language Models (LLMs) perform differently on identical programming tasks when prompted in different natural languages, a phenomenon known as language bias. While this behavior has been widely studied for general text generation, its impact on code generation quality and programming conventions remains largely unexplored.
The paper presents a taxonomy-driven framework for identifying, categorizing, and explaining bias in AI-generated Python code. By extending an existing dataset and manually annotating bias categories and justifications, the authors evaluate both proprietary and open-source large language models (LLMs) for automated bias detection and explanation. Results show that models such as Gemini and Qwen3-coder achieve high classification accuracy and produce justification and code identification similarities that closely match human-authored reasoning.
By Manaal Basha, Aimee M. Ribeiro, Gema Rodriguez-Perez
arXiv:2609.22102v1 Announce Type: cross
Abstract: Large Language Models (LLMs) are widely used as programming assistants, yet it remains unclear whether and how user's demographic information impacts...
By Anubhav Gupta, Mayara Costa Figueiredo, Leticia Santos Machado, Tanner Wright, Ivan Beschastnikh, Cleidson R. B. de Souza, Gema Rodr\'iguez-P\'erez
The paper introduces GPTBIAS, a framework that uses powerful large language models like GPT‑4 to evaluate bias in other LLMs. It employs specially crafted prompts called Bias Attack Instructions to probe for bias and outputs a bias score along with detailed information such as bias types, affected demographics, keywords, reasons, and improvement suggestions. Extensive experiments demonstrate the framework’s effectiveness and usability.
By Jiaxu Zhao, Meng Fang, Shirui Pan, Wenpeng Yin, Mykola Pechenizkiy
arXiv:2601. 02430v3 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Web applications (web apps) have become a key arena for large language models (LLMs) to demonstrate their code generation capabilities and commercial potential.
By Chenxu Liu, Yingjie Fu, Wei Yang, Ying Zhang, Tao Xie
Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly used as judges for code evaluation, assessing correctness without reference implementations. This study investigates whether LLM judges can fairly evaluate semantically equivalent code that differs in superficial aspects such as variable names, comments, or formatting. The authors define six types of potential bias, conduct experiments across five programming languages and multiple LLMs, and find that all tested judges exhibit both positive and negative biases, leading to inflated or unfairly low scores even when prompted to generate test cases.
By Jiwon Moon, Yerin Hwang, Dongryeol Lee, Taegwan Kang, Yongil Kim, Kyomin Jung
arXiv:2509.21891v3 Announce Type: replace-cross
Abstract: Fine-tuning large language models for code editing has typically relied on mining commits and pull requests. The working hypothesis has been...
By Yangtian Zi, Zixuan Wu, Aleksander Boruch-Gruszecki, Jonathan Bell, Arjun Guha
arXiv:2507. 11059v3 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: The rapid advancement of Large Language Models (LLMs) in software engineering has revealed critical limitations in existing benchmarks, particularly the widely used SWE-bench dataset.
By Pavel Adamenko, Mikhail Ivanov, Aidar Valeev, Rodion Levichev, Pavel Zadorozhny, Ivan Lopatin, Dmitry Babaev, Alena Fenogenova, Valentin Malykh
arXiv:2506. 02791v4 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: In recent years, code intelligence has gained increasing importance in the field of automated software engineering.
By Zhen Yang, Hongyi Lin, Yifan He, Junqi Wang, Zeyu Sun, Shuo Liu, Jie Xu, Pengpeng Wang, Zhongxing Yu, Qingyuan Liang
arXiv:2607. 03691v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Coding agents, autonomous systems that use large language models (LLMs) to resolve software engineering tasks, rely on agent harness: a middleware layer in between a developer and a large language model that orchestrates system prompts, tool execution, context management, and iterative reasoning loops.
By Oussama Ben Sghaier, Hao Li, Bram Adams, Ahmed E. Hassan