Beyond Trusting Trust: Multi-Model Validation for Robust Code Generation

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2502.16279v1
• Date: Sat, 22 Feb 2025 16:24:23 GMT
• Title: Beyond Trusting Trust: Multi-Model Validation for Robust Code Generation
• Authors: Bradley McDanel,
• Abstract summary: This paper explores the parallels between Thompson's "Reflections on Trusting Trust" and modern challenges in LLM-based code generation.<n>We propose an ensemble-based validation approach that leverages multiple independent models to detect anomalous code patterns.
• Score: 0.3626013617212667
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: This paper explores the parallels between Thompson's "Reflections on Trusting Trust" and modern challenges in LLM-based code generation. We examine how Thompson's insights about compiler backdoors take on new relevance in the era of large language models, where the mechanisms for potential exploitation are even more opaque and difficult to analyze. Building on this analogy, we discuss how the statistical nature of LLMs creates novel security challenges in code generation pipelines. As a potential direction forward, we propose an ensemble-based validation approach that leverages multiple independent models to detect anomalous code patterns through cross-model consensus. This perspective piece aims to spark discussion about trust and validation in AI-assisted software development.

Related papers

• On the Trustworthiness of Generative Foundation Models: Guideline, Assessment, and Perspective [314.7991906491166]
  Generative Foundation Models (GenFMs) have emerged as transformative tools.<n>Their widespread adoption raises critical concerns regarding trustworthiness across dimensions.<n>This paper presents a comprehensive framework to address these challenges through three key contributions.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-02-20T06:20:36Z)
• Trust Calibration in IDEs: Paving the Way for Widespread Adoption of AI Refactoring [5.342931064962865]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) offer a new approach to improving languages at unprecedented scale through AI-assisted.<n>LLMs come with inherent risks such as braking changes and the introduction of security vulnerabilities.<n>We advocate for encapsulating the interaction with the models in IDEs and validating attempts using trustworthy safeguards.<n>In this position paper, we position our future work based on established models from research on human factors in automation.<n>We outline action research within CodeScene on development of 1) novel safeguards and 2) user interaction that conveys an appropriate level of trust.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-12-20T14:44:11Z)
• LatentQA: Teaching LLMs to Decode Activations Into Natural Language [72.87064562349742]
  We introduce LatentQA, the task of answering open-ended questions about model activations in natural language.<n>We propose Latent Interpretation Tuning (LIT), which finetunes a decoder LLM on a dataset of activations and associated question-answer pairs.<n>Our decoder also specifies a differentiable loss that we use to control models, such as debiasing models on stereotyped sentences and controlling the sentiment of generations.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-12-11T18:59:33Z)
• Towards More Trustworthy and Interpretable LLMs for Code through Syntax-Grounded Explanations [48.07182711678573]
  ASTrust generates explanations grounded in the relationship between model confidence and syntactic structures of programming languages. We develop an automated visualization that illustrates the aggregated model confidence scores superimposed on sequence, heat-map, and graph-based visuals of syntactic structures from ASTs.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-07-12T04:38:28Z)
• Test-Time Fairness and Robustness in Large Language Models [17.758735680493917]
  Frontier Large Language Models (LLMs) can be socially discriminatory or sensitive to spurious features of their inputs. Existing solutions, which instruct the LLM to be fair or robust, rely on the model's implicit understanding of bias. We show that our prompting strategy, unlike implicit instructions, consistently reduces the bias of frontier LLMs.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-11T20:05:15Z)
• Validating LLM-Generated Programs with Metamorphic Prompt Testing [8.785973653167112]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) are increasingly integrated into the software development lifecycle. This paper proposes a novel solution called metamorphic prompt testing to address these challenges. Our evaluation on HumanEval shows that metamorphic prompt testing is able to detect 75 percent of the erroneous programs generated by GPT-4, with a false positive rate of 8.6 percent.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-11T00:40:17Z)
• Evaluation of large language models for assessing code maintainability [4.2909314120969855]
  We investigate the association between the cross-entropy of code generated by ten different models and quality aspects. Our results show that, controlling for the number of logical lines of codes, cross-entropy computed by LLMs is indeed a predictor of maintainability on a class level. While the complexity of LLMs affects the range of cross-entropy, this plays a significant role in predicting maintainability aspects.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-01-23T12:29:42Z)
• Benchmarking and Explaining Large Language Model-based Code Generation: A Causality-Centric Approach [12.214585409361126]
  Large language models (LLMs)- based code generation is a complex and powerful black-box model. We propose a novel causal graph-based representation of the prompt and the generated code. We illustrate the insights that our framework can provide by studying over 3 popular LLMs with over 12 prompt adjustment strategies.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-10-10T14:56:26Z)
• Evaluating and Explaining Large Language Models for Code Using Syntactic Structures [74.93762031957883]
  This paper introduces ASTxplainer, an explainability method specific to Large Language Models for code. At its core, ASTxplainer provides an automated method for aligning token predictions with AST nodes. We perform an empirical evaluation on 12 popular LLMs for code using a curated dataset of the most popular GitHub projects.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-08-07T18:50:57Z)
• Towards General Visual-Linguistic Face Forgery Detection [95.73987327101143]
  Deepfakes are realistic face manipulations that can pose serious threats to security, privacy, and trust. Existing methods mostly treat this task as binary classification, which uses digital labels or mask signals to train the detection model. We propose a novel paradigm named Visual-Linguistic Face Forgery Detection(VLFFD), which uses fine-grained sentence-level prompts as the annotation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-07-31T10:22:33Z)
• CodeLMSec Benchmark: Systematically Evaluating and Finding Security Vulnerabilities in Black-Box Code Language Models [58.27254444280376]
  Large language models (LLMs) for automatic code generation have achieved breakthroughs in several programming tasks. Training data for these models is usually collected from the Internet (e.g., from open-source repositories) and is likely to contain faults and security vulnerabilities. This unsanitized training data can cause the language models to learn these vulnerabilities and propagate them during the code generation procedure.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-02-08T11:54:07Z)
• Language as a Latent Sequence: deep latent variable models for semi-supervised paraphrase generation [47.33223015862104]
  We present a novel unsupervised model named variational sequence auto-encoding reconstruction (VSAR), which performs latent sequence inference given an observed text. To leverage information from text pairs, we additionally introduce a novel supervised model we call dual directional learning (DDL), which is designed to integrate with our proposed VSAR model. Our empirical evaluations suggest that the combined model yields competitive performance against the state-of-the-art supervised baselines on complete data.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-01-05T19:35:30Z)

This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.

This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.