The Hitchhiker's Guide to Program Analysis, Part II: Deep Thoughts by LLMs

April 16, 2025 Β· Declared Dead Β· πŸ› arXiv.org

πŸ‘» CAUSE OF DEATH: Ghosted
No code link whatsoever

"No code URL or promise found in abstract"

Evidence collected by the PWNC Scanner

Authors Haonan Li, Hang Zhang, Kexin Pei, Zhiyun Qian arXiv ID 2504.11711 Category cs.SE: Software Engineering Cross-listed cs.AI Citations 3 Venue arXiv.org Last Checked 4 months ago
Abstract
Static analysis plays a crucial role in software vulnerability detection, yet faces a persistent precision-scalability tradeoff. In large codebases like the Linux kernel, traditional static analysis tools often generate excessive false positives due to simplified vulnerability modeling and overapproximation of path and data constraints. While large language models (LLMs) demonstrate promising code understanding capabilities, their direct application to program analysis remains unreliable due to inherent reasoning limitations. We introduce BugLens, a post-refinement framework that significantly enhances static analysis precision for bug detection. BugLens guides LLMs through structured reasoning steps to assess security impact and validate constraints from the source code. When evaluated on Linux kernel taint-style bugs detected by static analysis tools, BugLens improves precision approximately 7-fold (from 0.10 to 0.72), substantially reducing false positives while uncovering four previously unreported vulnerabilities. Our results demonstrate that a well-structured, fully automated LLM-based workflow can effectively complement and enhance traditional static analysis techniques.
Community shame:
Not yet rated
Community Contributions

Found the code? Know the venue? Think something is wrong? Let us know!

πŸ“œ Similar Papers

In the same crypt β€” Software Engineering

Died the same way β€” πŸ‘» Ghosted