Does Your Neural Code Completion Model Use My Code? A Membership Inference Approach
0
Sign in to get full access
Motivating Examples
2.1. Example #1: A Lawsuit against GitHub Copilot
The paper discusses a lawsuit filed against GitHub Copilot, an AI-powered code completion tool. The lawsuit alleges that Copilot infringes on copyrights by generating code that is too similar to existing, copyrighted code. This highlights the potential conflict between the capabilities of AI language models and the legal protections around intellectual property. As AI models become more advanced in code generation, there are growing concerns about the appropriate use of such technologies and their impact on software development practices.
Plain English Explanation
The paper examines the issue of whether AI-powered code completion tools, like GitHub Copilot, may be infringing on copyrights by generating code that is too similar to existing, copyrighted code. This is a significant concern as these AI models become more advanced at generating human-like code. The paper uses a specific lawsuit against GitHub Copilot as a motivating example to highlight the potential conflicts between the capabilities of these AI tools and the legal protections around intellectual property. As AI is increasingly used in software development, there are growing questions about the appropriate use of these technologies and their impact on the software industry.
Technical Explanation
The paper introduces a motivating example of a lawsuit filed against GitHub Copilot, an AI-powered code completion tool. The lawsuit alleges that Copilot infringes on copyrights by generating code that is too similar to existing, copyrighted code. This case highlights the potential conflict between the capabilities of advanced AI language models in code generation and the legal protections around intellectual property. As AI is increasingly used in software development tasks, there are growing concerns about the appropriate use of such technologies and their impact on software engineering practices.
Critical Analysis
The paper uses the GitHub Copilot lawsuit as a motivating example to explore the broader challenges at the intersection of AI and intellectual property rights. While the paper does not delve into the specifics of this particular case, it highlights the general tension between the powerful code generation capabilities of AI models and the legal protections around copyrighted code. Further research and discussion are needed to address these issues and establish appropriate guidelines for the use of AI in software development.
Conclusion
The paper introduces the issue of AI-powered code completion tools, such as GitHub Copilot, potentially infringing on copyrights by generating code too similar to existing, copyrighted code. This lawsuit serves as a motivating example to illustrate the growing concerns around the use of advanced AI technologies in software development and their impact on intellectual property rights. As the capabilities of AI language models in code generation continue to evolve, there is a pressing need to address these challenges and establish appropriate guidelines for the responsible and ethical use of such technologies in the software industry.
This summary was produced with help from an AI and may contain inaccuracies - check out the links to read the original source documents!
Related Papers
0
Does Your Neural Code Completion Model Use My Code? A Membership Inference Approach
Yao Wan, Guanghua Wan, Shijie Zhang, Hongyu Zhang, Pan Zhou, Hai Jin, Lichao Sun
Recent years have witnessed significant progress in developing deep learning-based models for automated code completion. Although using source code in GitHub has been a common practice for training deep-learning-based models for code completion, it may induce some legal and ethical issues such as copyright infringement. In this paper, we investigate the legal and ethical issues of current neural code completion models by answering the following question: Is my code used to train your neural code completion model? To this end, we tailor a membership inference approach (termed CodeMI) that was originally crafted for classification tasks to a more challenging task of code completion. In particular, since the target code completion models perform as opaque black boxes, preventing access to their training data and parameters, we opt to train multiple shadow models to mimic their behavior. The acquired posteriors from these shadow models are subsequently employed to train a membership classifier. Subsequently, the membership classifier can be effectively employed to deduce the membership status of a given code sample based on the output of a target code completion model. We comprehensively evaluate the effectiveness of this adapted approach across a diverse array of neural code completion models, (i.e., LSTM-based, CodeGPT, CodeGen, and StarCoder). Experimental results reveal that the LSTM-based and CodeGPT models suffer the membership leakage issue, which can be easily detected by our proposed membership inference approach with an accuracy of 0.842, and 0.730, respectively. Interestingly, our experiments also show that the data membership of current large language models of code, e.g., CodeGen and StarCoder, is difficult to detect, leaving ampler space for further improvement. Finally, we also try to explain the findings from the perspective of model memorization.
Read more9/10/2024
0
LLM Dataset Inference: Did you train on my dataset?
Pratyush Maini, Hengrui Jia, Nicolas Papernot, Adam Dziedzic
The proliferation of large language models (LLMs) in the real world has come with a rise in copyright cases against companies for training their models on unlicensed data from the internet. Recent works have presented methods to identify if individual text sequences were members of the model's training data, known as membership inference attacks (MIAs). We demonstrate that the apparent success of these MIAs is confounded by selecting non-members (text sequences not used for training) belonging to a different distribution from the members (e.g., temporally shifted recent Wikipedia articles compared with ones used to train the model). This distribution shift makes membership inference appear successful. However, most MIA methods perform no better than random guessing when discriminating between members and non-members from the same distribution (e.g., in this case, the same period of time). Even when MIAs work, we find that different MIAs succeed at inferring membership of samples from different distributions. Instead, we propose a new dataset inference method to accurately identify the datasets used to train large language models. This paradigm sits realistically in the modern-day copyright landscape, where authors claim that an LLM is trained over multiple documents (such as a book) written by them, rather than one particular paragraph. While dataset inference shares many of the challenges of membership inference, we solve it by selectively combining the MIAs that provide positive signal for a given distribution, and aggregating them to perform a statistical test on a given dataset. Our approach successfully distinguishes the train and test sets of different subsets of the Pile with statistically significant p-values < 0.1, without any false positives.
Read more6/11/2024
🛠️
0
A Transformer-Based Approach for Smart Invocation of Automatic Code Completion
Aral de Moor, Arie van Deursen, Maliheh Izadi
Transformer-based language models are highly effective for code completion, with much research dedicated to enhancing the content of these completions. Despite their effectiveness, these models come with high operational costs and can be intrusive, especially when they suggest too often and interrupt developers who are concentrating on their work. Current research largely overlooks how these models interact with developers in practice and neglects to address when a developer should receive completion suggestions. To tackle this issue, we developed a machine learning model that can accurately predict when to invoke a code completion tool given the code context and available telemetry data. To do so, we collect a dataset of 200k developer interactions with our cross-IDE code completion plugin and train several invocation filtering models. Our results indicate that our small-scale transformer model significantly outperforms the baseline while maintaining low enough latency. We further explore the search space for integrating additional telemetry data into a pre-trained transformer directly and obtain promising results. To further demonstrate our approach's practical potential, we deployed the model in an online environment with 34 developers and provided real-world insights based on 74k actual invocations.
Read more5/24/2024
🤯
0
Did the Neurons Read your Book? Document-level Membership Inference for Large Language Models
Matthieu Meeus, Shubham Jain, Marek Rei, Yves-Alexandre de Montjoye
With large language models (LLMs) poised to become embedded in our daily lives, questions are starting to be raised about the data they learned from. These questions range from potential bias or misinformation LLMs could retain from their training data to questions of copyright and fair use of human-generated text. However, while these questions emerge, developers of the recent state-of-the-art LLMs become increasingly reluctant to disclose details on their training corpus. We here introduce the task of document-level membership inference for real-world LLMs, i.e. inferring whether the LLM has seen a given document during training or not. First, we propose a procedure for the development and evaluation of document-level membership inference for LLMs by leveraging commonly used data sources for training and the model release date. We then propose a practical, black-box method to predict document-level membership and instantiate it on OpenLLaMA-7B with both books and academic papers. We show our methodology to perform very well, reaching an AUC of 0.856 for books and 0.678 for papers. We then show our approach to outperform the sentence-level membership inference attacks used in the privacy literature for the document-level membership task. We further evaluate whether smaller models might be less sensitive to document-level inference and show OpenLLaMA-3B to be approximately as sensitive as OpenLLaMA-7B to our approach. Finally, we consider two mitigation strategies and find the AUC to slowly decrease when only partial documents are considered but to remain fairly high when the model precision is reduced. Taken together, our results show that accurate document-level membership can be inferred for LLMs, increasing the transparency of technology poised to change our lives.
Read more7/17/2024