Showing 1–10 of 10 results for author: Jabbarvand, R

A Tool for In-depth Analysis of Code Execution Reasoning of Large Language Models

Authors: Changshu Liu, Reyhaneh Jabbarvand

Abstract: Code Executing Reasoning is becoming a new non-functional metric that assesses the ability of large language models (LLMs) in programming tasks. State-of-the-art frameworks (CodeMind or REval) and benchmarks (CruxEval) usually focus on LLM's prediction of a given code's input/output or intermediate variable states/values on limited programs. However, there is no tool for more in-depth analysis of… ▽ More Code Executing Reasoning is becoming a new non-functional metric that assesses the ability of large language models (LLMs) in programming tasks. State-of-the-art frameworks (CodeMind or REval) and benchmarks (CruxEval) usually focus on LLM's prediction of a given code's input/output or intermediate variable states/values on limited programs. However, there is no tool for more in-depth analysis of the results. Without such a tool, the observations about LLM's code execution reasoning cannot be generalized to more datasets, preventing the research community and practitioners from devising the next generation of LLMs with better code execution reasoning abilities. This paper introduces ExeRScope, a series of tools and heuristics to analyze the result of code execution reasoning frameworks to understand better the impact of code properties in the studied benchmarks on the code execution reasoning. With such tooling, analysis can be generalized to code with similar properties without the urgent need to design more benchmarks, which is a cumbersome effort. △ Less

Submitted 30 January, 2025; originally announced January 2025.

Comments: 5 pages

Transforming the Hybrid Cloud for Emerging AI Workloads

Authors: Deming Chen, Alaa Youssef, Ruchi Pendse, André Schleife, Bryan K. Clark, Hendrik Hamann, Jingrui He, Teodoro Laino, Lav Varshney, Yuxiong Wang, Avirup Sil, Reyhaneh Jabbarvand, Tianyin Xu, Volodymyr Kindratenko, Carlos Costa, Sarita Adve, Charith Mendis, Minjia Zhang, Santiago Núñez-Corrales, Raghu Ganti, Mudhakar Srivatsa, Nam Sung Kim, Josep Torrellas, Jian Huang, Seetharami Seelam , et al. (20 additional authors not shown)

Abstract: This white paper, developed through close collaboration between IBM Research and UIUC researchers within the IIDAI Institute, envisions transforming hybrid cloud systems to meet the growing complexity of AI workloads through innovative, full-stack co-design approaches, emphasizing usability, manageability, affordability, adaptability, efficiency, and scalability. By integrating cutting-edge techno… ▽ More This white paper, developed through close collaboration between IBM Research and UIUC researchers within the IIDAI Institute, envisions transforming hybrid cloud systems to meet the growing complexity of AI workloads through innovative, full-stack co-design approaches, emphasizing usability, manageability, affordability, adaptability, efficiency, and scalability. By integrating cutting-edge technologies such as generative and agentic AI, cross-layer automation and optimization, unified control plane, and composable and adaptive system architecture, the proposed framework addresses critical challenges in energy efficiency, performance, and cost-effectiveness. Incorporating quantum computing as it matures will enable quantum-accelerated simulations for materials science, climate modeling, and other high-impact domains. Collaborative efforts between academia and industry are central to this vision, driving advancements in foundation models for material design and climate solutions, scalable multimodal data processing, and enhanced physics-based AI emulators for applications like weather forecasting and carbon sequestration. Research priorities include advancing AI agentic systems, LLM as an Abstraction (LLMaaA), AI model optimization and unified abstractions across heterogeneous infrastructure, end-to-end edge-cloud transformation, efficient programming model, middleware and platform, secure infrastructure, application-adaptive cloud systems, and new quantum-classical collaborative workflows. These ideas and solutions encompass both theoretical and practical research questions, requiring coordinated input and support from the research community. This joint initiative aims to establish hybrid clouds as secure, efficient, and sustainable platforms, fostering breakthroughs in AI-driven applications and scientific discovery across academia, industry, and society. △ Less

Submitted 21 May, 2025; v1 submitted 20 November, 2024; originally announced November 2024.

Comments: 70 pages, 27 figures

AlphaTrans: A Neuro-Symbolic Compositional Approach for Repository-Level Code Translation and Validation

Authors: Ali Reza Ibrahimzada, Kaiyao Ke, Mrigank Pawagi, Muhammad Salman Abid, Rangeet Pan, Saurabh Sinha, Reyhaneh Jabbarvand

Abstract: Code translation transforms programs from one programming language (PL) to another. Several rule-based transpilers have been designed to automate code translation between different pairs of PLs. However, the rules can become obsolete as the PLs evolve and cannot generalize to other PLs. Recent studies have explored the automation of code translation using Large Language Models (LLMs). One key obse… ▽ More Code translation transforms programs from one programming language (PL) to another. Several rule-based transpilers have been designed to automate code translation between different pairs of PLs. However, the rules can become obsolete as the PLs evolve and cannot generalize to other PLs. Recent studies have explored the automation of code translation using Large Language Models (LLMs). One key observation is that such techniques may work well for crafted benchmarks but fail to generalize to the scale and complexity of real-world projects with dependencies, custom types, PL-specific features, etc. We propose AlphaTrans, a neuro-symbolic approach to automate repository-level code translation. AlphaTrans translates both source and test code, and employs multiple levels of validation to ensure the translation preserves the functionality of the source program. To break down the problem for LLMs, AlphaTrans leverages program analysis to decompose the program into fragments and translates them in the reverse call order. We leveraged AlphaTrans to translate ten real-world open-source projects consisting of <836, 8575, 2719> classes, methods, and tests. AlphaTrans breaks down these projects into 17874 fragments and translates the entire repository. 96.40% of the translated fragments are syntactically correct, and AlphaTrans validates the translations' runtime behavior and functional correctness for 27.03% and 25.14% of fragments. On average, the integrated translation and validation take 34 hours to translate a project, showing its scalability in practice. For the incorrect translations, AlphaTrans generates a report including existing translation, stack trace, test errors, or assertion failures. We provided these artifacts to two developers to fix the translation bugs in four projects. They were able to fix the issues in 20.1 hours on average and achieve all passing tests. △ Less

Submitted 24 April, 2025; v1 submitted 31 October, 2024; originally announced October 2024.

Comments: Published in FSE 2025

A Generic Approach to Fix Test Flakiness in Real-World Projects

Authors: Yang Chen, Reyhaneh Jabbarvand

Abstract: Test flakiness, a non-deterministic behavior of builds irrelevant to code changes, is a major and continuing impediment to delivering reliable software. The very few techniques for the automated repair of test flakiness are specifically crafted to repair either Order-Dependent (OD) or Implementation-Dependent (ID) flakiness. They are also all symbolic approaches, i.e., leverage program analysis to… ▽ More Test flakiness, a non-deterministic behavior of builds irrelevant to code changes, is a major and continuing impediment to delivering reliable software. The very few techniques for the automated repair of test flakiness are specifically crafted to repair either Order-Dependent (OD) or Implementation-Dependent (ID) flakiness. They are also all symbolic approaches, i.e., leverage program analysis to detect and repair known test flakiness patterns and root causes, failing to generalize. To bridge the gap, we propose FlakyDoctor, a neuro-symbolic technique that combines the power of LLMs-generalizability-and program analysis-soundness-to fix different types of test flakiness. Our extensive evaluation using 873 confirmed flaky tests (332 OD and 541 ID) from 243 real-world projects demonstrates the ability of FlakyDoctor in repairing flakiness, achieving 57% (OD) and 59% (ID) success rate. Comparing to three alternative flakiness repair approaches, FlakyDoctor can repair 8% more ID tests than DexFix, 12% more OD flaky tests than ODRepair, and 17% more OD flaky tests than iFixFlakies. Regardless of underlying LLM, the non-LLM components of FlakyDoctor contribute to 12-31% of the overall performance, i.e., while part of the FlakyDoctor power is from using LLMs, they are not good enough to repair flaky tests in real-world projects alone. What makes the proposed technique superior to related research on test flakiness mitigation specifically and program repair, in general, is repairing 79 previously unfixed flaky tests in real-world projects. We opened pull requests for all cases with corresponding patches; 19 of them were accepted and merged at the time of submission. △ Less

Submitted 14 April, 2024; originally announced April 2024.

CodeMind: Evaluating Large Language Models for Code Reasoning

Authors: Changshu Liu, Yang Chen, Reyhaneh Jabbarvand

Abstract: Large Language Models (LLMs) have been widely used to automate programming tasks. Their capabilities have been evaluated by assessing the quality of generated code through tests or proofs. The extent to which they can reason about code is a critical question revealing important insights about their true capabilities. This paper introduces CodeMind, a framework designed to gauge the code reasoning… ▽ More Large Language Models (LLMs) have been widely used to automate programming tasks. Their capabilities have been evaluated by assessing the quality of generated code through tests or proofs. The extent to which they can reason about code is a critical question revealing important insights about their true capabilities. This paper introduces CodeMind, a framework designed to gauge the code reasoning abilities of LLMs through the following explicit and implicit code reasoning tasks: Independent Execution Reasoning (IER), Specification Reasoning (SR) and Dynamic Semantics Reasoning (DSR). The first evaluates the abilities of LLMs to simulate the execution of given inputs to a code and predict the output (IER). The second assesses the abilities of LLMs to incorporate the simulation of test data in the specification into code generation (SR). Finally, CodeMind evaluates LLMs' abilities to understand overall code semantics only given a specific input/output (DSR). Our extensive evaluation of ten LLMs across four widely used benchmarks using CodeMind shows that LLMs, depending on their size and training strategy, can reason about some dynamic aspects of code. However, their performance drops for code with higher complexity, non-trivial logical and arithmetic operators, non-primitive types, and API calls. We show that these reasoning tasks evaluate LLMs differently, and a comprehensive evaluation of code reasoning requires them all. Finally, we show that the performance of LLMs in bug repair is not correlated with any of the code reasoning tasks, and except for advanced frontier models, other LLMs do not incorporate code reasoning when performing bug repair. △ Less

Submitted 22 May, 2025; v1 submitted 14 February, 2024; originally announced February 2024.

WhiteFox: White-Box Compiler Fuzzing Empowered by Large Language Models

Authors: Chenyuan Yang, Yinlin Deng, Runyu Lu, Jiayi Yao, Jiawei Liu, Reyhaneh Jabbarvand, Lingming Zhang

Abstract: Compiler correctness is crucial, as miscompilation can falsify program behaviors, leading to serious consequences. Fuzzing has been studied to uncover compiler defects. However, compiler fuzzing remains challenging: Existing arts focus on black- and grey-box fuzzing, which generates tests without sufficient understanding of internal compiler behaviors. Meanwhile, traditional white-box techniques,… ▽ More Compiler correctness is crucial, as miscompilation can falsify program behaviors, leading to serious consequences. Fuzzing has been studied to uncover compiler defects. However, compiler fuzzing remains challenging: Existing arts focus on black- and grey-box fuzzing, which generates tests without sufficient understanding of internal compiler behaviors. Meanwhile, traditional white-box techniques, like symbolic execution, are computationally inapplicable to the giant codebase of compilers. Recent advances demonstrate that Large Language Models (LLMs) excel in code generation/understanding tasks. Nonetheless, guiding LLMs with compiler source-code information remains a missing piece of research in compiler testing. To this end, we propose WhiteFox, the first white-box compiler fuzzer using LLMs with source-code information to test compiler optimization, with a spotlight on detecting deep logic bugs in the deep learning (DL) compilers. WhiteFox adopts a multi-agent framework: an LLM-based analysis agent examines the low-level optimization source code and produces requirements on the high-level test programs that can trigger the optimization; an LLM-based generation agent produces test programs based on the summarized requirements. Additionally, optimization-triggering tests are used as feedback to enhance the generation on the fly. Our evaluation on the three most popular DL compilers (i.e., PyTorch Inductor, TensorFlow-XLA, and TensorFlow Lite) shows WhiteFox can generate high-quality test programs to exercise deep optimizations, practicing up to 8X more than state-of-the-art fuzzers. WhiteFox has found 101 bugs for the DL compilers, with 92 confirmed as previously unknown and 70 fixed. WhiteFox has been acknowledged by the PyTorch team and is being incorporated into its development workflow. Beyond DL compilers, WhiteFox can also be adapted for compilers in different domains. △ Less

Submitted 4 September, 2024; v1 submitted 24 October, 2023; originally announced October 2023.

Comments: Published in OOPSLA 2024

Journal ref: Proc. ACM Program. Lang., Vol. 8, No. OOPSLA2, Article 296. Publication date: October 2024

Automated Bug Generation in the era of Large Language Models

Authors: Ali Reza Ibrahimzada, Yang Chen, Ryan Rong, Reyhaneh Jabbarvand

Abstract: Bugs are essential in software engineering; many research studies in the past decades have been proposed to detect, localize, and repair bugs in software systems. Effectiveness evaluation of such techniques requires complex bugs, i.e., those that are hard to detect through testing and hard to repair through debugging. From the classic software engineering point of view, a hard-to-repair bug differ… ▽ More Bugs are essential in software engineering; many research studies in the past decades have been proposed to detect, localize, and repair bugs in software systems. Effectiveness evaluation of such techniques requires complex bugs, i.e., those that are hard to detect through testing and hard to repair through debugging. From the classic software engineering point of view, a hard-to-repair bug differs from the correct code in multiple locations, making it hard to localize and repair. Hard-to-detect bugs, on the other hand, manifest themselves under specific test inputs and reachability conditions. These two objectives, i.e., generating hard-to-detect and hard-to-repair bugs, are mostly aligned; a bug generation technique can change multiple statements to be covered only under a specific set of inputs. However, these two objectives are conflicting for learning-based techniques: A bug should have a similar code representation to the correct code in the training data to challenge a bug prediction model to distinguish them. The hard-to-repair bug definition remains the same but with a caveat: the more a bug differs from the original code, the more distant their representations are and easier to be detected. We propose BugFarm, to transform arbitrary code into multiple complex bugs. BugFarm leverages LLMs to mutate code in multiple locations (hard-to-repair). To ensure that multiple modifications do not notably change the code representation, BugFarm analyzes the attention of the underlying model and instructs LLMs to only change the least attended locations (hard-to-detect). Our comprehensive evaluation of 435k+ bugs from over 1.9M mutants generated by BUGFARM and two alternative approaches demonstrates our superiority in generating bugs that are hard to detect by learning-based bug prediction approaches and hard-to-repair by state-of-the-art learning-based program repair technique. △ Less

Submitted 3 October, 2024; v1 submitted 3 October, 2023; originally announced October 2023.

Lost in Translation: A Study of Bugs Introduced by Large Language Models while Translating Code

Authors: Rangeet Pan, Ali Reza Ibrahimzada, Rahul Krishna, Divya Sankar, Lambert Pouguem Wassi, Michele Merler, Boris Sobolev, Raju Pavuluri, Saurabh Sinha, Reyhaneh Jabbarvand

Abstract: Code translation aims to convert source code from one programming language (PL) to another. Given the promising abilities of large language models (LLMs) in code synthesis, researchers are exploring their potential to automate code translation. The prerequisite for advancing the state of LLM-based code translation is to understand their promises and limitations over existing techniques. To that en… ▽ More Code translation aims to convert source code from one programming language (PL) to another. Given the promising abilities of large language models (LLMs) in code synthesis, researchers are exploring their potential to automate code translation. The prerequisite for advancing the state of LLM-based code translation is to understand their promises and limitations over existing techniques. To that end, we present a large-scale empirical study to investigate the ability of general LLMs and code LLMs for code translation across pairs of different languages, including C, C++, Go, Java, and Python. Our study, which involves the translation of 1,700 code samples from three benchmarks and two real-world projects, reveals that LLMs are yet to be reliably used to automate code translation -- with correct translations ranging from 2.1% to 47.3% for the studied LLMs. Further manual investigation of unsuccessful translations identifies 15 categories of translation bugs. We also compare LLM-based code translation with traditional non-LLM-based approaches. Our analysis shows that these two classes of techniques have their own strengths and weaknesses. Finally, insights from our study suggest that providing more context to LLMs during translation can help them produce better results. To that end, we propose a prompt-crafting approach based on the symptoms of erroneous translations; this improves the performance of LLM-based code translation by 5.5% on average. Our study is the first of its kind, in terms of scale and breadth, that provides insights into the current limitations of LLMs in code translation and opportunities for improving them. Our dataset -- consisting of 1,700 code samples in five PLs with 10K+ tests, 43K+ translated code, 1,748 manually labeled bugs, and 1,365 bug-fix pairs -- can help drive research in this area. △ Less

Submitted 16 January, 2024; v1 submitted 6 August, 2023; originally announced August 2023.

Comments: Published in ICSE 2024

LeTI: Learning to Generate from Textual Interactions

Authors: Xingyao Wang, Hao Peng, Reyhaneh Jabbarvand, Heng Ji

Abstract: Fine-tuning pre-trained language models (LMs) is essential for enhancing their capabilities. Existing techniques commonly fine-tune on input-output pairs (e.g., instruction tuning) or with numerical rewards that gauge the output quality (e.g., RLHF). We explore LMs' potential to learn from textual interactions (LETI) that not only check their correctness with binary labels but also pinpoint and ex… ▽ More Fine-tuning pre-trained language models (LMs) is essential for enhancing their capabilities. Existing techniques commonly fine-tune on input-output pairs (e.g., instruction tuning) or with numerical rewards that gauge the output quality (e.g., RLHF). We explore LMs' potential to learn from textual interactions (LETI) that not only check their correctness with binary labels but also pinpoint and explain errors in their outputs through textual feedback. Our focus is the code generation task, where the model produces code based on natural language instructions. This setting invites a natural and scalable way to acquire textual feedback: the error messages and stack traces from code execution using a Python interpreter. LETI iteratively fine-tunes the model, using the LM objective, on a concatenation of natural language instructions, LM-generated programs, and textual feedback. Prepended to this fine-tuning text, a binary reward token is used to differentiate correct and buggy solutions. LETI requires no ground-truth outputs for training and even outperforms a fine-tuned baseline that does. LETI not only improves the performance of LMs on a code generation dataset MBPP, but also generalizes to other datasets. Trained on MBPP, it achieves comparable or better performance than the base LMs on unseen problems in HumanEval. Furthermore, compared to binary feedback, we observe that textual feedback leads to improved generation quality and sample efficiency, achieving the same performance with fewer than half of the gradient steps. LETI is equally applicable in natural language tasks when they can be formulated as code generation, which we empirically verified on event argument extraction. △ Less

Submitted 19 March, 2024; v1 submitted 17 May, 2023; originally announced May 2023.

Comments: NAACL 2024 Findings

Perfect is the enemy of test oracle

Authors: Ali Reza Ibrahimzada, Yigit Varli, Dilara Tekinoglu, Reyhaneh Jabbarvand

Abstract: Automation of test oracles is one of the most challenging facets of software testing, but remains comparatively less addressed compared to automated test input generation. Test oracles rely on a ground-truth that can distinguish between the correct and buggy behavior to determine whether a test fails (detects a bug) or passes. What makes the oracle problem challenging and undecidable is the assump… ▽ More Automation of test oracles is one of the most challenging facets of software testing, but remains comparatively less addressed compared to automated test input generation. Test oracles rely on a ground-truth that can distinguish between the correct and buggy behavior to determine whether a test fails (detects a bug) or passes. What makes the oracle problem challenging and undecidable is the assumption that the ground-truth should know the exact expected, correct, or buggy behavior. However, we argue that one can still build an accurate oracle without knowing the exact correct or buggy behavior, but how these two might differ. This paper presents SEER, a learning-based approach that in the absence of test assertions or other types of oracle, can determine whether a unit test passes or fails on a given method under test (MUT). To build the ground-truth, SEER jointly embeds unit tests and the implementation of MUTs into a unified vector space, in such a way that the neural representation of tests are similar to that of MUTs they pass on them, but dissimilar to MUTs they fail on them. The classifier built on top of this vector representation serves as the oracle to generate "fail" labels, when test inputs detect a bug in MUT or "pass" labels, otherwise. Our extensive experiments on applying SEER to more than 5K unit tests from a diverse set of open-source Java projects show that the produced oracle is (1) effective in predicting the fail or pass labels, achieving an overall accuracy, precision, recall, and F1 measure of 93%, 86%, 94%, and 90%, (2) generalizable, predicting the labels for the unit test of projects that were not in training or validation set with negligible performance drop, and (3) efficient, detecting the existence of bugs in only 6.5 milliseconds on average. △ Less

Submitted 5 April, 2023; v1 submitted 2 February, 2023; originally announced February 2023.

Comments: Published in ESEC/FSE 2022