Demonstration venue · read-only. Every page can be browsed; the buttons that would change it are switched off. Create an account to run TaxoReview on your own data. A simulation from public publication records: the people listed were not invited and did not agree to review.
? Tutorial for this page

Omniyyah Ibrahim

dblp:372/6685 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
1ranked-venue papers
0as first author
1since 2021 · last 2025
0009-0002-2461-5571ORCID · reported

Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several

Software engineering, systems software and programming languages · 1 · 1 since 2021

Expertise — from the expertise taxonomy: the topics of the expert's papers under the CCF categories. A weight counts papers with recency: 1 for a paper about the topic, 0.3 when the topic is its context, halved every five years.

Network and information security
1 paper
Systems and software security · 100%
Software engineering, system software, and programming languages
1 paper
Empirical software engineering · 100%

Topics — the 3 heaviest of 3, each with the papers that count most for it

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Systems and software security › vulnerability discovery
vulnerability dataset generation
0.912025
Vulnerability Detection with Code Language Models: How Far are We? · ICSE 2025
Systems and software security
vulnerability discovery
0.912025
Vulnerability Detection with Code Language Models: How Far are We? · ICSE 2025
Empirical software engineering
benchmarking
0.312025
Vulnerability Detection with Code Language Models: How Far are We? · ICSE 2025

Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics

deduplication · 1.7data labeling · 1.7chronological data splitting · 1.7code language models · 0.9code language model · 0.9
YearPublicationVenuePosition
2025 Vulnerability Detection with Code Language Models: How Far are We?
abstract
In the context of the rising interest in code language models (code LMs) and vulnerability detection, we study the effectiveness of code LMs for detecting vulnerabilities. Our analysis reveals significant shortcomings in existing vulnerability datasets, including poor data quality, low label accuracy, and high duplication rates, leading to unreliable model performance in realistic vulnerability detection scenarios. Additionally, the evaluation methods used with these datasets are not representative of real-world vulnerability detection. To address these challenges, we introduce Primevul, a new dataset for training and evaluating code LMs for vulnerability detection. Primevul incorporates a novel set of data labeling techniques that achieve comparable label accuracy to human-verified benchmarks while significantly expanding the dataset. It also implements a rigorous data de-duplication and chronological data splitting strategy to mitigate data leakage issues, alongside introducing more realistic evaluation metrics and settings. This comprehensive approach aims to provide a more accurate assessment of code LMs' performance in real-world conditions. Evaluating code LMs on Primevul reveals that existing benchmarks significantly overestimate the performance of these models. For instance, a state-of-the-art 7B model scored 68.26% Fl on BigVul but only 3.09% Fl on Primevul. Attempts to improve performance through advanced training techniques and larger models like GPT-3.5 and GPT-4 were unsuccessful, with results akin to random guessing in the most stringent settings. These findings underscore the considerable gap between current capabilities and the practical requirements for deploying code LMs in security roles, highlighting the need for more innovative research in this domain.
Yangruibo Ding, Yanjun Fu, Omniyyah Ibrahim, Chawin Sitawarin, Basel Alomair, David A. Wagner 0001, Baishakhi Ray, Yizheng Chen 0001
ICSE3