Reflections on the Reproducibility of Commercial LLM Performance in Empirical Software Engineering Studies
Florian Angermeir, Maximilian Amougou, Mark Kreitz, Andreas Bauer, Matthias Linhuber, Davide Fucci, Fabiola Moyon, Daniel Mendez, Gorschek Tony
Abstract
Large Language Models have gained remarkable interest in industry and academia. The increasing interest in LLMs in academia is also reflected in the number of publications on this topic over the last years. For instance, alone 78 of the around 425 publications at ICSE 2024 performed experiments with LLMs. Conducting empirical studies with LLMs remains challenging and raises questions on how to achieve reproducible results, for both researchers and practitioners. One important step towards excelling in empirical research on LLM and their application is to first understand to what extent current research results are eventually reproducible and what factors may impede reproducibility. This investigation is within the scope of our work.
We contribute an analysis of the reproducibility of LLM-centric studies, provide insights into the factors impeding reproducibility, and discuss suggestions on how to improve the current state. In particular, we studied the 85 articles describing LLM-centric studies, published at ICSE 2024 and ASE 2024. Of the 85 articles, 18 provided research artefacts and used OpenAI models. We attempted to replicate those 18 studies. Of the 18 studies, only five were sufficiently complete and executable. For none of the five studies, we were able to fully reproduce the results. Two studies seemed to be partially reproducible, and three studies did not seem to be reproducible. Our results highlight not only the need for stricter research artefact evaluations but also for more robust study designs to ensure the reproducible value of future publications.
Ask about this paper
Your agent reads all of it.
Lune indexed this paper to the last equation, along with the top-tier papers that cite it. Ask a question and the answer quotes them.
Your agent calls
Luneget_paper_fulltext
Free to start. No credit card required.
Terminal
Install the CLIlune papers fulltext 489200f3-80c3-4b57-be09-5713aee3adfbCited by top-tier papers1
Ask how each one uses itBuilds on17
- Retrieval-Based Prompt Selection for Code-Related Few-Shot LearningNoor Nashid, Mifta Sintaha, Ali MesbahICSE 2023 · 156 citations
- Large Language Models are Few-Shot Summarizers: Multi-Intent Comment Generation via In-Context LearningMingyang Geng, Shangwen Wang, Dezun Dong, Haotian Wang et al.ICSE 2024 · 124 citations
- CoderEval: A Benchmark of Pragmatic Code Generation with Generative Pre-trained ModelsHao Yu, Bo Shen, Dezhi Ran, Jiaxin Zhang et al.ICSE 2024 · 107 citations
- Lost in Translation: A Study of Bugs Introduced by Large Language Models while Translating CodeRangeet Pan, Ali Reza Ibrahimzada, Rahul Krishna, Divya Sankar et al.ICSE 2024 · 96 citations
- Automatic Semantic Augmentation of Language Model Prompts (for Code Summarization)Toufique Ahmed, Kunal Suresh Pai, Premkumar T. Devanbu, Earl T. BarrICSE 2024 · 71 citations
Related papers
- Chasing Shadows: Pitfalls in LLM Security ResearchJonathan Evertz, Niklas Risse, Nicolai Neuer, Andreas Müller et al.NDSS 2026 · 17 citations
- Understanding the LLM-ification of CHI: Unpacking the Impact of LLMs at CHI through a Systematic Literature ReviewRock Yuren Pang, Hope Schroeder, Kynnedy Simone Smith, Solon Barocas et al.CHI 2025 · 51 citations
- Can GPT-4 Replicate Empirical Software Engineering Research?Jenny T. Liang, Carmen Badea, Christian Bird, Robert DeLine et al.FSE 2024 · 15 citations
- DataDreamer: A Tool for Synthetic Data Generation and Reproducible LLM WorkflowsAjay Patel, Colin Raffel, Chris Callison-BurchACL 2024
- A Systematic Survey and Critical Review on Evaluating Large Language Models: Challenges, Limitations, and RecommendationsMd. Tahmid Rahman Laskar, Sawsan Alqahtani, M. Saiful Bari, Mizanur Rahman et al.EMNLP 2024 · 47 citations
