Demo Data from EDBT 2026 / reviewers in the wild / expert
Gabriela Krasnopolska
dblp:368/8140
· DBLP profile ↗
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
| Topic | Weight | Papers | Last | Evidence papers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Systems and software security
insecure code generation |
0.8 | 1 | 2024 | Instruction Tuning for Secure Code Generation · ICML 2024 |
Systems and software security
software vulnerability |
0.8 | 1 | 2024 | Instruction Tuning for Secure Code Generation · ICML 2024 |
Program synthesis and code generation
code generation with language models |
0.8 | 1 | 2024 | Instruction Tuning for Secure Code Generation · ICML 2024 |
Program synthesis and code generation › code generation with language models
secure code generation |
0.8 | 1 | 2024 | 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
| Year | Publication | Venue | Position |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2024 | Instruction Tuning for Secure Code GenerationabstractModern 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 |
ICML | 3 |