Large Language Models Suffer From Their Own Output: An Analysis of the Self-Consuming Training Loop

Large language models (LLM) have become state of the art in many benchmarks and conversational LLM applications like ChatGPT are now widely used by the public. Those LLMs can be used to generate large amounts of content which is posted on the internet to various platforms. As LLMs are trained on datasets usually collected from the internet, this LLM-generated content might be used to train the next generation of LLMs. Therefore, a self-consuming training loop emerges in which new LLM generations are trained on the output from the previous generations. We empirically study this self-consuming training loop using a novel dataset to analytically and accurately measure quality and diversity of generated outputs. We find that this self-consuming training loop initially improves both quality and diversity. However, after a few generations the output inevitably degenerates in diversity. We find that the rate of degeneration depends on the proportion of real and generated data

MTGP: Combining Metamorphic Testing and Genetic Programming

Genetic programming is an evolutionary approach known for its performance in program synthesis. However, it is not yet mature enough for a practical use in real-world software development, since usually many training cases are required to generate programs that generalize to unseen test cases. As in practice, the training cases have to be expensively hand-labeled by the user, we need an approach to check the program behavior with a lower number of training cases. Metamorphic testing needs no labeled input/output examples. Instead, the program is executed multiple times, first on a given (randomly generated) input, followed by related inputs to check whether certain user-defined relations between the observed outputs hold. In this work, we suggest MTGP, which combines metamorphic testing and genetic programming and study its performance and the generalizability of the generated programs. Further, we analyze how the generalizability depends on the number of given labeled training cases. We find that using metamorphic testing combined with labeled training cases leads to a higher generalization rate than the use of labeled training cases alone in almost all studied configurations. Consequently, we recommend researchers to use metamorphic testing in their systems if the labeling of the training data is expensive

Do You Trust ChatGPT? -- Perceived Credibility of Human and AI-Generated Content

This paper examines how individuals perceive the credibility of content originating from human authors versus content generated by large language models, like the GPT language model family that powers ChatGPT, in different user interface versions. Surprisingly, our results demonstrate that regardless of the user interface presentation, participants tend to attribute similar levels of credibility. While participants also do not report any different perceptions of competence and trustworthiness between human and AI-generated content, they rate AI-generated content as being clearer and more engaging. The findings from this study serve as a call for a more discerning approach to evaluating information sources, encouraging users to exercise caution and critical thinking when engaging with content generated by AI systems

An Analysis of the Automatic Bug Fixing Performance of ChatGPT

To support software developers in finding and fixing software bugs, several automated program repair techniques have been introduced. Given a test suite, standard methods usually either synthesize a repair, or navigate a search space of software edits to find test-suite passing variants. Recent program repair methods are based on deep learning approaches. One of these novel methods, which is not primarily intended for automated program repair, but is still suitable for it, is ChatGPT. The bug fixing performance of ChatGPT, however, is so far unclear. Therefore, in this paper we evaluate ChatGPT on the standard bug fixing benchmark set, QuixBugs, and compare the performance with the results of several other approaches reported in the literature. We find that ChatGPT's bug fixing performance is competitive to the common deep learning approaches CoCoNut and Codex and notably better than the results reported for the standard program repair approaches. In contrast to previous approaches, ChatGPT offers a dialogue system through which further information, e.g., the expected output for a certain input or an observed error message, can be entered. By providing such hints to ChatGPT, its success rate can be further increased, fixing 31 out of 40 bugs, outperforming state-of-the-art

Enhancing Genetic Improvement Mutations Using Large Language Models

Large language models (LLMs) have been successfully applied to software engineering tasks, including program repair. However, their application in search-based techniques such as Genetic Improvement (GI) is still largely unexplored. In this paper, we evaluate the use of LLMs as mutation operators for GI to improve the search process. We expand the Gin Java GI toolkit to call OpenAI's API to generate edits for the JCodec tool. We randomly sample the space of edits using 5 different edit types. We find that the number of patches passing unit tests is up to 75% higher with LLM-based edits than with standard Insert edits. Further, we observe that the patches found with LLMs are generally less diverse compared to standard edits. We ran GI with local search to find runtime improvements. Although many improving patches are found by LLM-enhanced GI, the best improving patch was found by standard GI.Comment: Accepted for publication at the Symposium on Search-Based Software Engineering (SSBSE) 202

The Randomness of Input Data Spaces is an A Priori Predictor for Generalization

Over-parameterized models can perfectly learn various types of data distributions, however, generalization error is usually lower for real data in comparison to artificial data. This suggests that the properties of data distributions have an impact on generalization capability. This work focuses on the search space defined by the input data and assumes that the correlation between labels of neighboring input values influences generalization. If correlation is low, the randomness of the input data space is high leading to high generalization error. We suggest to measure the randomness of an input data space using Maurer's universal. Results for synthetic classification tasks and common image classification benchmarks (MNIST, CIFAR10, and Microsoft's cats vs. dogs data set) find a high correlation between the randomness of input data spaces and the generalization error of deep neural networks for binary classification problems

Enhancing Genetic Improvement Mutations Using Large Language Models

Large language models (LLMs) have been successfully applied to software engineering tasks, including program repair. However, their application in search-based techniques such as Genetic Improvement (GI) is still largely unexplored. In this paper, we evaluate the use of LLMs as mutation operators for GI to improve the search process. We expand the Gin Java GI toolkit to call OpenAI's API to generate edits for the JCodec tool. We randomly sample the space of edits using 5 different edit types. We find that the number of patches passing unit tests is up to 75% higher with LLM-based edits than with standard Insert edits. Further, we observe that the patches found with LLMs are generally less diverse compared to standard edits. We ran GI with local search to find runtime improvements. Although many improving patches are found by LLM-enhanced GI, the best improving patch was found by standard GI

Enhancing Genetic Improvement Mutations Using Large Language Models

Large language models (LLMs) have been successfully applied to software engineering tasks, including program repair. However, their application in search-based techniques such as Genetic Improvement (GI) is still largely unexplored. In this paper, we evaluate the use of LLMs as mutation operators for GI to improve the search process. We expand the Gin Java GI toolkit to call OpenAI's API to generate edits for the JCodec tool. We randomly sample the space of edits using 5 different edit types. We find that the number of patches passing unit tests is up to 75% higher with LLM-based edits than with standard Insert edits. Further, we observe that the patches found with LLMs are generally less diverse compared to standard edits. We ran GI with local search to find runtime improvements. Although many improving patches are found by LLM-enhanced GI, the best improving patch was found by standard GI