跳到正文
研踪PaperTrail
← 研踪 PaperTrail

arXiv:2611.02957 · v2

Cyber-JEV: Matched Contrastive Fine-Tuning of Language Models for Fast Source-Code Vulnerability Triage

首次提交 2026-11-02 19:24
版本更新 2026-11-03 19:36
雷达观测 2026-11-04 23:39
arXiv ↗PDF ↗

摘要

Single-pass scoring models such as Jev give each code function a vulnerability probability, so that security teams can rank many functions for review without generating written explanations. Training an open-weight model for this task is limited by data. Benchmarks with both vulnerable and non-vulnerable labels keep few vulnerable functions once examples related to the test data are removed, while larger public vulnerability records mostly contain vulnerable functions only. Mixing the two lets the data source predict the label, and training on the labeled data alone leaves a model that often scores a fixed function above its vulnerable original. We present Cyber-JEV, a fine-tuning method that uses fix commits to turn these records into comparison groups. Each group holds a vulnerable function, its patched version and up to two unchanged functions from the same file, so the model sees the change that removed a recorded defect. One shared model learns two tasks: classifying functions from the labeled reference data, and ranking the vulnerable function above the other members of its group. At test time the input is one function and the output is a vulnerability score. On a test benchmark of 7,270 functions, an ensemble of five fine-tuned Qwen3.5-4B models reaches an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of 0.814, compared with 0.743 for Jev 1.13. With the 4,031 alerts of Jev as the review budget, it misses 16 of 322 vulnerable functions instead of 39. Compared with training on the reference data alone, it ranks the vulnerable version above the patched version 14.8 to 29.2 percentage points more often on three sets of real fixes. Such scores can order the changed functions of a pull request or a release for review under a fixed budget.

作者备注:8 pages, 3 figures, 5 tables. Added project page (manuscript unchanged): https://ricardoz-kisara.github.io/cyber-jev/

AI 论文解读

基于摘要 · 非全文审阅

此版本尚未生成 AI 解读。解读由后台任务生成并按论文版本保存,登录后共享已有结果。

版本差异

目前只观测到一个版本,无法比较变化。之后收录新版本时,会在这里对照标题、作者、分类和摘要。

观测到的版本

相邻记录可能跳过中间版本;首次发现 v2 及以上也会标为版本更新。

v2 · 2026-11-03 19:36 · 最新观测版本

Cyber-JEV: Matched Contrastive Fine-Tuning of Language Models for Fast Source-Code Vulnerability Triage

Single-pass scoring models such as Jev give each code function a vulnerability probability, so that security teams can rank many functions for review without generating written explanations. Training an open-weight model for this task is limited by data. Benchmarks with both vulnerable and non-vulnerable labels keep few vulnerable functions once examples related to the test data are removed, while larger public vulnerability records mostly contain vulnerable functions only. Mixing the two lets the data source predict the label, and training on the labeled data alone leaves a model that often scores a fixed function above its vulnerable original. We present Cyber-JEV, a fine-tuning method that uses fix commits to turn these records into comparison groups. Each group holds a vulnerable function, its patched version and up to two unchanged functions from the same file, so the model sees the change that removed a recorded defect. One shared model learns two tasks: classifying functions from the labeled reference data, and ranking the vulnerable function above the other members of its group. At test time the input is one function and the output is a vulnerability score. On a test benchmark of 7,270 functions, an ensemble of five fine-tuned Qwen3.5-4B models reaches an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of 0.814, compared with 0.743 for Jev 1.13. With the 4,031 alerts of Jev as the review budget, it misses 16 of 322 vulnerable functions instead of 39. Compared with training on the reference data alone, it ranks the vulnerable version above the patched version 14.8 to 29.2 percentage points more often on three sets of real fixes. Such scores can order the changed functions of a pull request or a release for review under a fixed budget.

查看此版本解读 →查看此版本原文 ↗