Search arXivSearch

arXiv · 2512.03421

Exploring the Potential and Limitations of Large Language Models for Novice Program Fault Localization

Abstract

Novice programmers often face challenges in fault localization due to their limited experience and understanding of programming syntax and logic. Traditional methods like Spectrum-Based Fault Localization (SBFL) and Mutation-Based Fault Localization (MBFL) help identify faults but often lack the ability to understand code context, making them less effective for beginners. In recent years, Large Language Models (LLMs) have shown promise in overcoming these limitations by utilizing their ability to understand program syntax and semantics. LLM-based fault localization provides more accurate and context-aware results than traditional techniques. This study evaluates six closed-source and seven open-source LLMs using the Codeflaws, Condefects, and BugT datasets, with BugT being a newly constructed dataset specifically designed to mitigate data leakage concerns. Advanced models with reasoning capabilities, such as OpenAI o3 and DeepSeekR1, achieve superior accuracy with minimal reliance on prompt engineering. In contrast, models without reasoning capabilities, like GPT-4, require carefully designed prompts to maintain performance. While LLMs perform well in simple fault localization, their accuracy decreases as problem difficulty increases, though top models maintain robust performance in the BugT dataset. Over-reasoning is another challenge, where some models generate excessive explanations that hinder fault localization clarity. Additionally, the computational cost of deploying LLMs remains a significant barrier for real-time debugging. LLM's explanations demonstrate significant value for novice programmer assistance, with one-year experience participants consistently rating them highly. Our findings demonstrate the potential of LLMs to improve debugging efficiency while stressing the need for further refinement in their reasoning and computational efficiency for practical adoption.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Hexiang Xu, Hengyuan Liu, Yonghao Wu, Xiaolan Kang, Xiang Chen, Yong Liu. 2025-12-03. Exploring the Potential and Limitations of Large Language Models for Novice Program Fault Localization. https://arxiv.org/abs/2512.03421

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

Combining Type Inference and Automated Unit Test Generation for Python

Automated unit test generation is an established research field that has so far focused on statically-typed programming languages. The lack of type information in dynamically-typed programming languages, such as Python, inhibits test generators, which heavily rely on information about parameter and return types of functions to select suitable arguments when constructing test cases. Since automated test generators inherently rely on frequent execution of candidate tests, we make use of these frequent executions to address this problem by introducing type tracing, which extracts type-related information during execution and gradually refines the available type information. We implement type tracing as an extension of the Pynguin test-generation framework for Python, allowing it (i) to infer parameter types by observing how parameters are used during runtime, (ii) to record the types of values that function calls return, and (iii) to use this type information to increase code coverage. The approach leads to up to 87.8 % more branch coverage, improved mutation scores, and to type information of similar quality to that produced by other state-of-the-art type-inference tools.

cs.SE

Guidelines for Empirical Studies in Software Engineering involving Large Language Models

Large Language Models (LLMs) are widely used in software engineering (SE) research and practice, yet their non-determinism, opaque training data, and rapidly evolving models threaten the reproducibility and replicability of empirical studies. We address this challenge through a collaborative effort of 22 researchers, presenting a taxonomy of seven study types that organizes how LLMs are used in SE research, together with eight guidelines for designing and reporting such studies. Each guideline distinguishes requirements (must) from recommendations (should) and is contextualized by the study types it applies to. Our guidelines recommend that researchers: (1) declare LLM usage and role; (2) report model versions, configurations, and customizations; (3) document the system and prompt design beyond the model; (4) report session traces, i.e., interaction logs and runtime traces; (5) use suitable baselines, benchmarks, and metrics; (6) include an open LLM as a baseline; (7) validate LLM outputs against human judgment; and (8) articulate limitations and mitigations. We complement the guidelines with an applicability matrix mapping guidelines to study types and a reporting checklist for authors and reviewers. We maintain the study types and guidelines online as a living resource for the community to use and shape (llm-guidelines$.$org).

cs.SE

MigrateLib: a tool for end-to-end Python library migration

Library migration is the process of replacing a library with a similar one in a software project. Manual library migration is time consuming and error prone, as it requires developers to understand the Application Programming Interfaces (API) of both libraries, map equivalent APIs, and perform the necessary code transformations. Due to the difficulty of the library migration process, most of the existing automated techniques and tooling stop at the API mapping stage or support a limited set of libraries and code transformations. In this paper, we develop an end-to-end solution that can automatically migrate code between any arbitrary pair of Python libraries that provide similar functionality. Due to the promising capabilities of Large Language Models (LLMs) in code generation and transformation, we use LLMs as the primary engine for migration. Before building the tool, we first study the capabilities of LLMs for library migration on a benchmark of 321 real-world library migrations. We find that LLMs can effectively perform library migration, but some post-processing steps can further improve the performance. Based on this, we develop MigrateLib, a command line application that combines the power of LLMs, static analysis, and dynamic analysis to provide accurate library migration. We evaluate MigrateLib on 717 real-world Python applications that are not from our benchmark. We find that MigrateLib can migrate 32% of the migrations with complete correctness. Of the remaining migrations, only 14% of the migration-related changes are left for developers to fix for more than half of the projects.

cs.SE