Showing 1–4 of 4 results for author: Nashid, N

Contextual API Completion for Unseen Repositories Using LLMs

Authors: Noor Nashid, Taha Shabani, Parsa Alian, Ali Mesbah

Abstract: Large language models have made substantial progress in addressing diverse code-related tasks. However, their adoption is hindered by inconsistencies in generating output due to the lack of real-world, domain-specific information, such as for intra-repository API calls for unseen software projects. We introduce a novel technique to mitigate hallucinations by leveraging global and local contextual… ▽ More Large language models have made substantial progress in addressing diverse code-related tasks. However, their adoption is hindered by inconsistencies in generating output due to the lack of real-world, domain-specific information, such as for intra-repository API calls for unseen software projects. We introduce a novel technique to mitigate hallucinations by leveraging global and local contextual information within a code repository for API completion tasks. Our approach is tailored to refine code completion tasks, with a focus on optimizing local API completions. We examine relevant import statements during API completion to derive insights into local APIs, drawing from their method signatures. For API token completion, we analyze the inline variables and correlate them with the appropriate imported modules, thereby allowing our approach to rank the most contextually relevant suggestions from the available local APIs. Further, for conversational API completion, we gather APIs that are most relevant to the developer query with a retrieval-based search across the project. We employ our tool, LANCE, within the framework of our proposed benchmark, APIEval, encompassing two different programming languages. Our evaluation yields an average accuracy of 82.6% for API token completion and 76.9% for conversational API completion tasks. On average, LANCE surpasses Copilot by 143% and 142% for API token completion and conversational API completion, respectively. The implications of our findings are substantial for developers, suggesting that our lightweight context analysis can be applied to multilingual environments without language-specific training or fine-tuning, allowing for efficient implementation with minimal examples and effort. △ Less

Submitted 14 May, 2024; v1 submitted 7 May, 2024; originally announced May 2024.

Bridging Semantics for Automated Web Form Testing

Authors: Parsa Alian, Noor Nashid, Mobina Shahbandeh, Ali Mesbah

Abstract: Automated test generation for web forms has been a longstanding challenge, exacerbated by the intrinsic human-centric design of forms and their complex, device-agnostic structures. We introduce an innovative approach, called FormNexus, for automated web form test generation, which emphasizes deriving semantic insights from individual form elements and relations among them, utilizing textual conten… ▽ More Automated test generation for web forms has been a longstanding challenge, exacerbated by the intrinsic human-centric design of forms and their complex, device-agnostic structures. We introduce an innovative approach, called FormNexus, for automated web form test generation, which emphasizes deriving semantic insights from individual form elements and relations among them, utilizing textual content, DOM tree structures, and visual proximity. The insights gathered are transformed into a new conceptual graph, the Form Entity Relation Graph (FERG), which offers machine-friendly semantic information extraction. Leveraging LLMs, FormNexus adopts a feedback-driven mechanism for generating and refining input constraints based on real-time form submission responses. The culmination of this approach is a robust set of test cases, each produced by methodically invalidating constraints, ensuring comprehensive testing scenarios for web forms. This work bridges the existing gap in automated web form testing by intertwining the capabilities of LLMs with advanced semantic inference methods. Our evaluation demonstrates that FormNexus combined with GPT-4 achieves 89% coverage in form submission states. This outcome significantly outstrips the performance of the best baseline model by a margin of 25%. △ Less

Submitted 1 February, 2024; originally announced February 2024.

Katana: Dual Slicing-Based Context for Learning Bug Fixes

Authors: Mifta Sintaha, Noor Nashid, Ali Mesbah

Abstract: Contextual information plays a vital role for software developers when understanding and fixing a bug. Consequently, deep learning-based program repair techniques leverage context for bug fixes. However, existing techniques treat context in an arbitrary manner, by extracting code in close proximity of the buggy statement within the enclosing file, class, or method, without any analysis to find act… ▽ More Contextual information plays a vital role for software developers when understanding and fixing a bug. Consequently, deep learning-based program repair techniques leverage context for bug fixes. However, existing techniques treat context in an arbitrary manner, by extracting code in close proximity of the buggy statement within the enclosing file, class, or method, without any analysis to find actual relations with the bug. To reduce noise, they use a predefined maximum limit on the number of tokens to be used as context. We present a program slicing-based approach, in which instead of arbitrarily including code as context, we analyze statements that have a control or data dependency on the buggy statement. We propose a novel concept called dual slicing, which leverages the context of both buggy and fixed versions of the code to capture relevant repair ingredients. We present our technique and tool called Katana, the first to apply slicing-based context for a program repair task. The results show Katana effectively preserves sufficient information for a model to choose contextual information while reducing noise. We compare against four recent state-of-the-art context-aware program repair techniques. Our results show Katana fixes between 1.5 to 3.7 times more bugs than existing techniques. △ Less

Submitted 5 December, 2022; v1 submitted 30 April, 2022; originally announced May 2022.

A Controlled Experiment of Different Code Representations for Learning-Based Bug Repair

Authors: Marjane Namavar, Noor Nashid, Ali Mesbah

Abstract: Training a deep learning model on source code has gained significant traction recently. Since such models reason about vectors of numbers, source code needs to be converted to a code representation before vectorization. Numerous approaches have been proposed to represent source code, from sequences of tokens to abstract syntax trees. However, there is no systematic study to understand the effect o… ▽ More Training a deep learning model on source code has gained significant traction recently. Since such models reason about vectors of numbers, source code needs to be converted to a code representation before vectorization. Numerous approaches have been proposed to represent source code, from sequences of tokens to abstract syntax trees. However, there is no systematic study to understand the effect of code representation on learning performance. Through a controlled experiment, we examine the impact of various code representations on model accuracy and usefulness in deep learning-based program repair. We train 21 different generative models that suggest fixes for name-based bugs, including 14 different homogeneous code representations, four mixed representations for the buggy and fixed code, and three different embeddings. We assess if fix suggestions produced by the model in various code representations are automatically patchable, meaning they can be transformed to a valid code that is ready to be applied to the buggy code to fix it. We also conduct a developer study to qualitatively evaluate the usefulness of inferred fixes in different code representations. Our results highlight the importance of code representation and its impact on learning and usefulness. Our findings indicate that (1) while code abstractions help the learning process, they can adversely impact the usefulness of inferred fixes from a developer's point of view; this emphasizes the need to look at the patches generated from the practitioner's perspective, which is often neglected in the literature, (2) mixed representations can outperform homogeneous code representations, (3) bug type can affect the effectiveness of different code representations; although current techniques use a single code representation for all bug types, there is no single best code representation applicable to all bug types. △ Less

Submitted 15 July, 2022; v1 submitted 26 October, 2021; originally announced October 2021.