arXiv:2409.02474cs.SEcs.CL2024-09中稿 · publication in the…被引 15

对比6个大模型在日志解析中的表现,发现免费模型也能超越付费模型。

A Comparative Study on Large Language Models for Log Parsing

  • 选用6个主流大模型,设计两种提示策略测试日志模板提取能力。
  • CodeLlama比GPT-3.5多正确解析10%的日志模板,准确率超其付费对手。
  • 代码专用模型在日志解析中优势明显,适合开发者快速部署使用。

日志消息包含软件系统状态的重要信息,但以非结构化形式呈现,需自动化方法提取关键参数。日志解析可将日志转换为结构化模板。近年来,语言模型推动了该任务进展,已有研究尝试用ChatGPT实现日志解析并取得良好效果。然而,其他前沿大语言模型(LLMs)在该任务上的表现尚不明确。本研究评估了当前最先进的六种大模型在日志解析中的能力,包括两款付费专有模型(GPT-3.5、Claude 2.1)和四款免费开源模型。实验基于16个成熟开源项目收集的1,354条日志模板,采用两种提示方法进行测试。评估指标包括正确识别模板数量及生成模板与真实模板的语法相似度。结果显示,免费模型表现可媲美付费模型,其中CodeLlama比GPT-3.5多正确解析10%的模板。此外,研究还提供了对模型可用性的定性分析,如响应易用性等。结论表明,部分小型免费模型,尤其是代码优化型模型,在日志解析任务中显著优于其商业对手。

原文摘要 · Abstract (English)

Background: Log messages provide valuable information about the status of software systems. This information is provided in an unstructured fashion and automated approaches are applied to extract relevant parameters. To ease this process, log parsing can be applied, which transforms log messages into structured log templates. Recent advances in language models have led to several studies that apply ChatGPT to the task of log parsing with promising results. However, the performance of other state-of-the-art large language models (LLMs) on the log parsing task remains unclear. Aims: In this study, we investigate the current capability of state-of-the-art LLMs to perform log parsing. Method: We select six recent LLMs, including both paid proprietary (GPT-3.5, Claude 2.1) and four free-to-use open models, and compare their performance on system logs obtained from a selection of mature open-source projects. We design two different prompting approaches and apply the LLMs on 1, 354 log templates across 16 different projects. We evaluate their effectiveness, in the number of correctly identified templates, and the syntactic similarity between the generated templates and the ground truth. Results: We found that free-to-use models are able to compete with paid models, with CodeLlama extracting 10% more log templates correctly than GPT-3.5. Moreover, we provide qualitative insights into the usability of language models (e.g., how easy it is to use their responses). Conclusions: Our results reveal that some of the smaller, free-to-use LLMs can considerably assist log parsing compared to their paid proprietary competitors, especially code-specialized models.

日志解析大模型代码生成开源模型

Thank you to arXiv for use of its open access interoperability. PaperDance 不是 arXiv 官方产品;中文卡片由大模型生成,请以原文为准。