跳到正文
研踪PaperTrail

YOUR RESEARCH, IN SIGHT

让下一篇重要论文,不再错过。

覆盖计算机全学科,以 AI 为快捷入口。关注方向、作者和关键词,把发现变成持续的研究积累。

部分采集异常
正在读取账号与研究记录…

全站更新概况

+4958新增论文
+4071其中 AI 相关
+108已有论文修订
+122新增 AI 导读

arXiv 最近完成扫描:2026-11-05 01:50 · 全站最近入库:2026-11-05 02:44各信源进度 →

统计口径与数据新鲜度

统计 2026-11-04 02:45 — 2026-11-05 02:45(北京时间) · 点击数字查看对应简报;AI 相关包含在新增论文内。

最近完成检查:2026-11-05 01:50最近发现新增版本:2026-11-05 02:44库内论文最新更新时间:2026-11-04 08:00

每分钟刷新已保存的数据。空检查不代表采集异常;新收录可能包含历史论文。AI 导读按新增版本计数。

13,635 已收录论文11,746 AI 相关3,088 有修订112 HF 社区发现

浏览论文库

时间范围跟随排序:版本更新、本站收录或首次发表。最新收录可能包含历史论文。部分信源异常,查看状态 →

找到 1 篇论文 · 按版本更新时间排序上轮扫描起点 2026-11-05 01:47(北京时间)
版本更新 · v2arXiv:2610.34928

Beyond Compilation Feedback: Refining Vulnerability Checkers with Program-Analysis Evidence

Chengzhi Yi, Shenao Wang, Yanjie Zhao, Xiao Cheng, Haoyu Wang

Recent work shows that LLMs can synthesize static-analysis checkers from security patches, but a compilable checker is not necessarily a correct one. A patch reveals what changed, not why the change is safe, so generated checkers often match only the surface edit and miss the deeper semantic condition. Existing refinement loops feed back compilation errors and validation reports, yet these signals describe symptoms without explaining what the checker misunderstands about the code. We observe that the analysis framework itself already computes the information needed to close this gap. Control-flow graphs, symbolic values, memory regions and checker callbacks are available inside the analyzer but unused by current refinement strategies. SemWeaver is a plug-in refinement layer that extracts patch-relevant analyzer evidence and assembles it with source context and validation feedback into a structured, provenance-labelled bundle. An iterative editing loop refines the checker on both the vulnerable and fixed revisions, guarded by a retention gate that accepts warning recovery or false-positive reduction while preventing over-pruning. We evaluate SemWeaver on 39 KNighter-derived CSA checkers from Linux kernel fixes. With analyzer evidence, refinement reaches 23 warning-positive vulnerable revisions (vs. 15 for KNighter's loop) and raises version-level $F_1$ from 0.448 to 0.575. An ablation removing internal evidence recovers fewer silent cases and produces different checker edits, indicating that the two evidence configurations address complementary recognition gaps. Additional experiments cover three editor models on a 12-subject subset, a CodeQL query refinement, and controlled source-form variations. A qualitative follow-up on all 11 non-tied comparisons traces each warning-count change to a specific checker repair, such as recognizing a lowered callback or unwrapping an expression cast.

尚无 AI 解读,展示原文摘要

cs.SE
arXiv ↗PDF ↗