Memorization Diagnostics for Code LLMs Should be Scale-Aware
The extent to which large language models for code rely on memorization over genuine understanding remains highly debated. While current literature frequently reports widespread memorization, evaluating the underlying probing techniques across dense architectures reveals a severe breakdown in their utility at scale. Traditional encoder-style probes using perturbations such as synonym fuzzing or dead-code insertion struggle to expose memorization in scaled models, even on known-contaminated benchmarks, and decoder-style probes that rely on log probabilities show similar performance degradation. The specific mode of failure for these probes, particularly why such techniques disrupt smaller models but fail to impact larger ones, motivates us to untangle representation load from memorization rather than treating them as a single phenomenon. By applying invertible mathematical transforms to numeric problems, we isolate these two factors and reveal that scaled encoders successfully absorb substantial representation load while still converging on the correct family of solutions. In practical software engineering, this ability to adapt to varying surface forms is what truly matters for usability and generalizability in LLM and agentic applications. Whether a specific solution was seen during training becomes a much less pressing question because although memorization inflates scores on contaminated benchmarks, factoring out representation load makes it debatable how much we should truly care if a functional answer was originally memorized. Future evaluations must therefore be built around separating these phenomena rather than relying on methodologies that quietly entangle them.
Code (1)
Similar Papers 제목 키워드 기반
LLMs Can Leak Training Data But Do They Want To? A Propensity-Aware Evaluation of Memorization in LLMs
Large language models can reproduce training data, but existing memorization evaluations mostly measure whether models can be forced to do so, rather than whether they do so under ordinary use. We introduce PropMe, a pro…
Do LLMs Really Memorize Personally Identifiable Information? Revisiting PII Leakage with a Cue-Controlled Memorization Framework
Large Language Models (LLMs) have been reported to "leak" Personally Identifiable Information (PII), with successful PII reconstruction often interpreted as evidence of memorization. We propose a principled revision of m…
Alpaca against Vicuna: Using LLMs to Uncover Memorization of LLMs
In this paper, we introduce a black-box prompt optimization method that uses an attacker LLM agent to uncover higher levels of memorization in a victim agent, compared to what is revealed by prompting the target model wi…
MemorizationPrivate Memorization Editing: Turning Memorization into a Defense to Strengthen Data Privacy in Large Language Models
Large Language Models (LLMs) memorize, and thus, among huge amounts of uncontrolled data, may memorize Personally Identifiable Information (PII), which should not be stored and, consequently, not leaked. In this paper, w…
Language ModelingLanguage ModellingMemorizationA Comparative Analysis of LLM Memorization at Statistical and Internal Levels: Cross-Model Commonalities and Model-Specific Signatures
Memorization is a fundamental component of intelligence for both humans and LLMs. However, while LLM performance scales rapidly, our understanding of memorization lags. Due to limited access to the pre-training data of L…