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

Yaoxuan Wu

dblp:353/7588 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
3ranked-venue papers
1as first author
3since 2021 · last 2026
0009-0001-0623-4110ORCID · corroborated

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

Software engineering, systems software and programming languages · 2 · 1 first-author · 2 since 2021Security and privacy · 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.

Software engineering, system software, and programming languages
2 papers
Software testing · 92% Program analysis · 8%
Network and information security
1 paper
Security and privacy of machine learning · 100%

Topics — the 6 heaviest of 7, each with the papers that count most for it

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Security and privacy of machine learning › adversarial attack
backdoor attack
0.712023
PELICAN: Exploiting Backdoors of Naturally Trained Deep Learning Models In Binary Code Analysis · USENIX Security Symposium 2023
Software testing
fuzzing
0.712023
NaturalFuzz: Natural Input Generation for Big Data Analytics · ASE 2023
Software testing › test input generation
synthetic test data generation
0.712023
NaturalFuzz: Natural Input Generation for Big Data Analytics · ASE 2023
Software testing
test input generation
0.712023
NaturalFuzz: Natural Input Generation for Big Data Analytics · ASE 2023
Software testing › test coverage
code coverage
0.212023
NaturalFuzz: Natural Input Generation for Big Data Analytics · ASE 2023
Software testing
test coverage
0.212023
NaturalFuzz: Natural Input Generation for Big Data Analytics · ASE 2023

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

deep learning · 1.3fuzzing · 0.7data provenance · 0.7
YearPublicationVenuePosition
2026 PALM: Path-aware LLM-based Test Generation with Comprehension
abstract
Symbolic execution is a widely used technique for test generation, offering systematic exploration of program paths through constraint solving. However, it is fundamentally constrained by the capability to model the target code including library functions in terms of symbolic constraint and the capability of underlying constraint solvers. As a result, many paths involving complex features remain unanalyzed or insufficiently modeled. Recent advances in large language models (LLMs) have shown promise in generating diverse and valid test inputs. Yet, LLMs lack mechanisms for systematically enumerating program paths and often fail to cover subtle corner cases. We observe that directly prompting an LLM with the full program leads to missed coverage of interesting paths.
Yaoxuan Wu, Ahmad Humayun, Muhammad Ali Gulzar, Miryung Kim
ICPC1
2023 NaturalFuzz: Natural Input Generation for Big Data Analytics
abstract
Fuzzing applies input mutations iteratively with the only goal of finding more bugs, resulting in synthetic tests that tend to lack realism. Big data analytics are expected to ingest real-world data as input. Therefore, when synthetic test data are not easily comprehensible, they are less likely to facilitate the downstream task of fixing errors. Our position is that fuzzing in this domain must achieve both high naturalness and high code coverage. We propose a new natural synthetic test generation tool for big data analytics, called NaturalFuzz. It generates both unstructured, semi-structured, and structured data with corresponding semantics such as ‘zipcode’ and ‘age.’ The key insights behind NaturalFuzz are two-fold. First, though existing test data may be small and lack coverage, we can grow this data to increase code coverage. Second, we can strategically mix constituent parts across different rows and columns to construct new realistic synthetic data by leveraging fine-grained data provenance. On commercial big data application benchmarks, NaturalFuzz achieves an additional 19.9% coverage and detects 1.9× more faults than a machine learning-based synthetic data generator (SDV) when generating comparably sized inputs. This is because an ML-based synthetic data generator does not consider which code branches are exercised by which input rows from which tables, while NaturalFuzz is able to select input rows that have a high potential to increase code coverage and mutate the selected data towards unseen, new program behavior. NaturalFuzz's test data is more realistic than the test data generated by two baseline fuzzers (BigFuzz and Jazzer), while increasing code coverage and fault detection potential. NaturalFuzz is the first fuzzing methodology with three benefits: (1) exclusively generate natural inputs, (2) fuzz multiple input sources simultaneously, and (3) find deeper semantics faults.
Ahmad Humayun, Yaoxuan Wu, Miryung Kim, Muhammad Ali Gulzar
ASE2
2023 PELICAN: Exploiting Backdoors of Naturally Trained Deep Learning Models In Binary Code Analysis
Zhuo Zhang 0002, Guanhong Tao 0001, Guangyu Shen, Shengwei An, Qiuling Xu, Yingqi Liu, Yapeng Ye, Yaoxuan Wu, Xiangyu Zhang 0001
USENIX Security Symposium8