IRepair: An Intent-Aware Approach to Repair Data-Driven Errors in Large Language Models
Sayem Mohammad Imtiaz, Astha Singh, Fraol Batole, Hridesh Rajan
Abstract
Not a day goes by without hearing about the impressive feats of large language models (LLMs), and equally, not a day passes without hearing about their challenges. LLMs are notoriously vulnerable to biases in their dataset, leading to issues such as toxicity, harmful responses, and factual inaccuracies. While domain-adaptive training has been employed to mitigate these issues, these techniques often address all model parameters indiscriminately during the repair process, resulting in poor repair quality and reduced model versatility. In this paper, drawing inspiration from fault localization via program slicing, we introduce a novel dynamic slicing-based intent-aware LLM repair strategy, IRepair. This approach selectively targets the most error-prone sections of the model for repair. Specifically, we propose dynamically slicing the model’s most sensitive layers that require immediate attention, concentrating repair efforts on those areas. This method enables more effective repairs with potentially less impact on the model’s overall versatility by altering a smaller portion of the model. Furthermore, dynamic selection allows for a more nuanced and precise model repair compared to a fixed selection strategy. We evaluated our technique on three models from the GPT2 and GPT-Neo families, with parameters ranging from 800M to 1.6B, in a toxicity mitigation setup. Our results show that IRepair repairs errors 43.6% more effectively while causing 46% less disruption to general performance compared to the closest baseline, direct preference optimization. Our empirical analysis also reveals that errors are more concentrated in a smaller section of the model, with the top 20% of layers exhibiting 773% more error density than the remaining 80%. This highlights the need for selective repair. Additionally, we demonstrate that a dynamic selection approach is essential for addressing errors dispersed throughout the model, ensuring a robust and efficient repair.
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.
Builds on24
- Training language models to follow instructions with human feedbackLong Ouyang, Jeffrey Wu, Xu Jiang, Diogo Almeida et al.NeurIPS 2022 · 24,707 citations
- LoRA: Low-Rank Adaptation of Large Language ModelsEdward J. Hu, Yelong Shen, Phillip Wallis, Zeyuan Allen-Zhu et al.ICLR 2022 · 18,833 citations
- Direct Preference Optimization: Your Language Model is Secretly a Reward ModelRafael Rafailov, Archit Sharma, Eric Mitchell, Christopher D. Manning et al.NeurIPS 2023 · 10,924 citations
- Locating and Editing Factual Associations in GPTKevin Meng, David Bau, Alex Andonian, Yonatan BelinkovNeurIPS 2022 · 3,415 citations
- Plug and Play Language Models: A Simple Approach to Controlled Text GenerationSumanth Dathathri, Andrea Madotto, Janice Lan, Jane Hung et al.ICLR 2020 · 1,166 citations
Related papers
- Aligning the Objective of LLM-Based Program RepairJunjielong Xu, Ying Fu, Shin Hwei Tan, Pinjia HeICSE 2025 · 5 citations
- Automated Program Repair in the Era of Large Pre-trained Language ModelsChunqiu Steven Xia, Yuxiang Wei, Lingming ZhangICSE 2023 · 321 citations
- LLM-Based Repair of Static Nullability ErrorsNima Karimipour, Pascal Joos, Michael Pradel, Martin Kellogg et al.ISSTA 2026
- Well Begun is Half Done: Location-Aware and Trace-Guided Iterative Automated Vulnerability RepairZhenlei Ye, Xiaobing Sun, Sicong Cao, Lili Bo et al.ICSE 2026
- An Empirical Study on Fine-Tuning Large Language Models of Code for Automated Program RepairKai Huang, Xiangxin Meng, Jian Zhang, Yang Liu et al.ASE 2023 · 91 citations
