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

Weining Cao

dblp:393/9603 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
1ranked-venue papers
0as first author
1since 2021 · last 2024
0009-0006-2433-4920ORCID · 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.

Software engineering, system software, and programming languages
1 paper
Program verification · 100%

Topics — the 2 heaviest of 2, each with the papers that count most for it

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Program verification › model checking
bounded model checking
0.812024
LLM Meets Bounded Model Checking: Neuro-symbolic Loop Invariant Inference · ASE 2024
Program verification › invariant generation
loop invariant generation
0.812024
LLM Meets Bounded Model Checking: Neuro-symbolic Loop Invariant Inference · ASE 2024

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

large language model · 0.8SMT solving · 0.8
YearPublicationVenuePosition
2024 LLM Meets Bounded Model Checking: Neuro-symbolic Loop Invariant Inference
abstract
Loop invariant inference, a key component in program verification, is a challenging task due to the inherent undecidability and complex loop behaviors in practice. Recently, machine learning based techniques have demonstrated impressive performance in generating loop invariants automatically. However, these methods highly rely on the labeled training data, and are intrinsically random and uncertain, leading to unstable performance. In this paper, we investigate a synergy of large language models (LLMs) and bounded model checking (BMC) to address these issues. The key observation is that, although LLMs may not be able to return the correct loop invariant in one response, they usually can provide all individual predicates of the correct loop invariant in multiple responses. To this end, we propose a "query-filter-reassemble" strategy, namely, we first leverage the language generation power of LLMs to produce a set of candidate invariants, where training data is not needed. Then, we employ BMC to identify valid predicates from these candidate invariants, which are assembled to produce new candidate invariants and checked by off-the-shelf SMT solvers. The feedback is incorporated into the prompt for the next round of LLM querying. We expand the existing benchmark of 133 programs to 316 programs, providing a more comprehensive testing ground. Experimental results demonstrate that our approach significantly outperforms the state-of-the-art techniques, successfully generating 309 loop invariants out of 316 cases, whereas the existing baseline methods are only able to tackle 219 programs at best. The code is publicly available at https://github.com/SoftWiser-group/LaM4Inv.git.
Guangyuan Wu, Weining Cao, Yuan Yao 0001, Hengfeng Wei, Taolue Chen 0001, Xiaoxing Ma
ASE2