Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 cited by

Unveiling Memorization in Code Models

Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.

SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event

T0 review · schema-true

One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.

pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp

arxiv 2308.09932 v2 pith:5P2PLLHM submitted 2023-08-19 cs.SE

classification cs.SE
keywords codememorizationmodelsdatatrainingmemorizedmodeloutputs
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal
0 comments
read the original abstract

The availability of large-scale datasets, advanced architectures, and powerful computational resources have led to effective code models that automate diverse software engineering activities. The datasets usually consist of billions of lines of code from both open-source and private repositories. A code model memorizes and produces source code verbatim, which potentially contains vulnerabilities, sensitive information, or code with strict licenses, leading to potential security and privacy issues. This paper investigates an important problem: to what extent do code models memorize their training data? We conduct an empirical study to explore memorization in large pre-trained code models. Our study highlights that simply extracting 20,000 outputs (each having 512 tokens) from a code model can produce over 40,125 code snippets that are memorized from the training data. To provide a better understanding, we build a taxonomy of memorized contents with 3 categories and 14 subcategories. The results show that the prompts sent to the code models affect the distribution of memorized contents. We identify several key factors of memorization. Specifically, given the same architecture, larger models suffer more from memorization problems. A code model produces more memorization when it is allowed to generate longer outputs. We also find a strong positive correlation between the number of an output's occurrences in the training data and that in the generated outputs, which indicates that a potential way to reduce memorization is to remove duplicates in the training data. We then identify effective metrics that infer whether an output contains memorization accurately. We also make suggestions to deal with memorization.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 2 Pith papers

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. Code Simulation as a Proxy for High-order Tasks in Large Language Models

    cs.LG 2025-02 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

    LLM performance on naturalistic reasoning tasks tracks performance on equivalent Python code simulation, but the effect is partly driven by pattern matching and memorization rather than faithful execution.

  2. SoK: The Privacy Paradox of Large Language Models: Advancements, Privacy Risks, and Mitigation

    cs.CR 2025-06 conditional novelty 3.0 of 10

    A systematization-of-knowledge survey that categorizes LLM privacy risks into training data, prompts, outputs, and agents, and reviews limitations of current mitigations.

Pith tools