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

Gabriela Krasnopolska

dblp:368/8140 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
1ranked-venue papers
0as first author
1since 2021 · last 2024
—ORCID · none

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

Artificial intelligence and machine learning · 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
Program synthesis and code generation · 100%

Topics — the 4 heaviest of 4, each with the papers that count most for it

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Systems and software security
insecure code generation
0.812024
Instruction Tuning for Secure Code Generation · ICML 2024
Systems and software security
software vulnerability
0.812024
Instruction Tuning for Secure Code Generation · ICML 2024
Program synthesis and code generation
code generation with language models
0.812024
Instruction Tuning for Secure Code Generation · ICML 2024
Program synthesis and code generation › code generation with language models
secure code generation
0.812024
Instruction Tuning for Secure Code Generation · ICML 2024

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

instruction tuning · 1.5fine-tuning · 1.5
YearPublicationVenuePosition
2024 Instruction Tuning for Secure Code Generation
abstract
Modern language models (LMs) have gained widespread acceptance in everyday and professional contexts, particularly in programming. An essential procedure enabling this adoption is instruction tuning, which substantially enhances LMs’ practical utility by training them to follow user instructions and human preferences. However, existing instruction tuning schemes overlook a crucial aspect: the security of generated code. As a result, even the state-of-the-art instruction-tuned LMs frequently produce unsafe code, posing significant security risks. In this work, we introduce SafeCoder to address this gap. SafeCoder performs security-centric fine-tuning using a diverse and high-quality dataset that we collected using an automated pipeline. We integrate the security fine-tuning with standard instruction tuning, to facilitate a joint optimization of both security and utility. Despite its simplicity, we show that SafeCoder is effective across a variety of popular LMs and datasets. It is able to drastically improve security (by about 30%), while preserving utility.
Mark Vero, Gabriela Krasnopolska, Martin T. Vechev
ICML3