Searcharxiv⌕ Search

arXiv subjects

Gias Uddin

Publications and source records attributed to Gias Uddin.

At least 19 recordsLinked to original sources
arXiv2026

Adversarial Testing of Automated Program Repair Agents for Security Vulnerabilities

Software agents with Large Language Models (LLMs) are designed for Automated Program Repair (APR) tasks, raising the possibility that, in the near future, APR agents will fix bugs automatically without much human intervention. Can we trust an APR agent to produce both functionally correct and secure code in such situations? What if attackers target production APR agents with adversarial issues that seem benign but may influence the agents to produce correct but insecure code? In this paper, we took a first step towards answering these questions by conducting an empirical study. First, we created SWEADV, a benchmark of 750 adversarial issue descriptions constructed from 150 repair tasks in SWE-bench Verified. For each repair task, we created five adversarial issue descriptions, one for each attack type: command execution, deserialization, path traversal, denial of service, and weak hashing. Second, we evaluated mini_swe APR agents from three LLM backends on SWEADV: GPT-5-Mini, MiniMax-M2.5, and DeepSeek-R. We found that on average, adversarial issue descriptions can induce malicious behaviors with successful repair in 51.7% of cases. Third, we investigated whether typical detection mechanisms are sufficient to prevent such malicious patches from being accepted. Pre-repair detection with LLM-as-judge on the adversarial issue descriptions resulted in an average detection accuracy of only 62.3%. Post-repair detection on adversarial APR patches using static analysis tools and LLM-as-judge achieved average detection accuracies of only 39.4% and 55.4%, respectively. We conclude that autonomous APR agents cannot be trusted yet in production deployment, given their susceptibility to adversarial attacks.

cs.CR↗
arXiv2026

Stack Trace-Based Crash Deduplication with Transformer Adaptation

Automated crash reporting systems generate large volumes of duplicate reports, overwhelming issue-tracking systems and increasing developer workload. Traditional stack trace-based deduplication methods---relying on string similarity, rule-based heuristics, or deep learning (DL) models---often fail to capture the contextual and structural relationships within stack traces. We propose dedupT, a transformer-based approach that models stack traces holistically rather than as isolated frames. dedupT first adapts a pretrained language model (PLM) to stack traces, then uses its embeddings to train a fully-connected network (FCN) to rank duplicate crashes effectively. Extensive experiments on real-world datasets show that dedupT outperforms existing DL and traditional methods (e.g., sequence alignment and information retrieval techniques) in both duplicate ranking and unique crash detection, significantly reducing manual triage effort. On four public datasets, dedupT improves Mean Reciprocal Rank (MRR) often by over 15% compared to the best DL baseline and up to 10% over traditional methods while achieving higher Receiver Operating Characteristic Area Under the Curve (ROC-AUC) in detecting unique crash reports. Our work advances the integration of modern natural language processing (NLP) techniques into software engineering, providing an effective solution for stack trace-based crash deduplication.

cs.SE↗
arXiv2026

Impossible to hide secret ...: Uncovering Security and Privacy Issues in LLM-native IDEs

LLM-native IDEs (Integrated Development Environments), aka LIDEs, are designed from the ground up to work with Large Language Models (LLMs). LIDEs have found remarkable success in Software Engineering (SE) tasks such as coding, debugging, and program comprehension. LIDEs are software systems, and, like any system, they can exhibit vulnerabilities. In this paper, we study the security and privacy issues that developers reported while using popular LIDEs in their development tasks. We collected 1.1M posts from 29 popular subreddits related to LIDEs. We identified 446 posts and analyzed over 6K comments to the posts that discussed security and privacy issues in almost all popular LIDEs, such as Cursor, Copilot, Codex, etc. Using a mix of qualitative and quantitative methods, we constructed a taxonomy of the reported security and privacy issues. Our results show that most issues in LIDEs stem from system-level design choices, rather than the underlying LLMs, such as user data access, unchecked autonomous actions, etc. To overcome these issues, developers frequently relied on external safeguards like code sandboxing and manual reviewing, highlighting prevalent mistrust among developers about LIDEs. We share lessons from our study to support future design of secure and privacy-aware LIDEs.

cs.SE↗
arXiv2026

Reward-Free Code Alignment from Pretrained or Fine-Tuned LLM: Unpacking the Trade-offs for Code Generation

Large Language Model (LLM) alignment trains an LLM using preference data to produce outputs that better meet established quality standards. While LLM alignment techniques are studied for non-coding tasks, we know little about their usefulness for coding tasks. It is unclear whether LLM code alignment could support both functional requirements (producing executable, correct code) and non-functional requirements (code readability, style, maintainability). It is also unknown whether alignment for a code LLM should begin with base pretrained version or the finetuned (i.e., instruction-tuned) version of the LLM. In this paper, we offer insights on the above two research questions by conducting an empirical study. We studied five state-of-the-art (SOTA) LLMs using two widely used LLM alignment techniques: Direct Preference Optimization (DPO) and BoNBoN. For each training record, we created a preference pair as accepted and rejected instances by using the SelfCodeAlign pipeline. DPO and BoNBoN are reward-free models, i.e., they eliminate the need for multiple reward scores for output preferences. We tuned each LLM using the two alignment techniques in two settings: pretrained and finetuned versions of an LLM. We evaluated functional requirements using four SOTA benchmarks (HumanEval+, MBPP+, EvalPerf, EvoEval) and non-functional requirements using the CODAL benchmark, which evaluates code quality across five dimensions derived from software engineering practices. We find that pretrained-to-aligned pathways achieve larger improvements in the aligned variant over its pretrained variant. But the pretrained variant is generally less accurate than its finetuned variant. However, finetuned- to-aligned offers smaller performance improvements or, in some cases, degradation in the aligned variant than its finetuned variant.

cs.SE↗
arXiv2026

BLAgent: Agentic RAG for File-Level Bug Localization

Bug localization remains a key bottleneck for large language model (LLM)-based software maintenance, where accurately identifying faulty code is essential for debugging, root cause analysis, triage, and automated program repair (APR). File-level bug localization is especially critical in hierarchical localization and repair pipelines, where incorrect file selection can propagate to downstream stages such as function-level localization and patch generation. While Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) offers a promising way to ground LLMs in repository context, existing RAG pipelines often rely on static retrieval and lack the reasoning needed to accurately identify faulty code. In this work, we present BLAgent, a novel agentic RAG framework for file-level bug localization that integrates three key ideas: (i) code structure-aware repository encoding with path-augmented AST-based chunking, (ii) dual-perspective query transformation that captures both structural and behavioral signals from bug reports, and (iii) two-phase agentic reranking that combines symbolic inspection with evidence-grounded reasoning. Unlike prior graph-based or multi-hop agentic approaches, BLAgent adopts a bounded reasoning strategy that limits LLM-based inspection and reranking to a compact, retrieval-filtered set of candidate files, avoiding open-ended repository traversal. This design balances localization accuracy with computational cost. On SWE-bench-Lite, BLAgent attains over 78% Top-1 accuracy with open-source models and over 86% with a closed-source model, while being over 18x cheaper than the strongest baseline using the same model. When integrated into an APR framework, BLAgent improves end-to-end repair success by up to 25%.

cs.SE↗
arXiv2026

ABTest: Behavior-Driven Testing for AI Coding Agents

AI coding agents are increasingly integrated into real-world software development workflows, yet their robustness under diverse and adversarial scenarios remains poorly understood. We present ABTest, a behavior-driven fuzzing framework that systematically tests coding agents by turning real-world failure reports into repository-grounded behavioral tests. ABTest (1) mines user-reported anomalies to derive reusable workflow patterns (Interaction Patterns) and behaviors (Action types); (2) composes them into stepwise fuzzing templates; (3) instantiates executable test cases in real repositories; (4) executes them with coding agents while recording traces and artifacts; and (5) detects and validates anomalous behaviors. We apply ABTest to three widely used coding agents: Claude Code, OpenAI Codex CLI, and Gemini CLI. From 400 user-reported developer-confirmed agent failures, we extract 47 Interaction Patterns and 128 Action types, generating 647 repository-grounded fuzzing cases. Executing the 647-case bundle once per evaluated configuration, ABTest flags 1,573 behavioral anomalies across the three coding agent families, of which 642 are manually confirmed as new true anomalies, achieving a detection precision of 40.8%. Our results demonstrate that ABTest effectively uncovers real-world failures, exposes robustness differences across models, and reveals previously unreported failure modes.

cs.SE↗
arXiv2026

Secret Leak Detection in Software Issue Reports using LLMs: A Comprehensive Evaluation

In the digital era, accidental exposure of sensitive information such as API keys, tokens, and credentials is a growing security threat. While most prior work focuses on detecting secrets in source code, leakage in software issue reports remains largely unexplored. This study fills that gap through a large-scale analysis and a practical detection pipeline for exposed secrets in GitHub issues. Our pipeline combines regular expression-based extraction with large language model (LLM)-based contextual classification to detect real secrets and reduce false positives. We build a benchmark of 54,148 instances from public GitHub issues, including 5,881 manually verified true secrets. Using this dataset, we evaluate entropy-based baselines and keyword heuristics used by prior secret detection tools, classical machine learning, deep learning, and LLM-based methods. Regex and entropy based approaches achieve high recall but poor precision, while smaller models such as RoBERTa and CodeBERT greatly improve performance (F1 = 92.70%). Proprietary models like GPT-4o perform moderately in few-shot settings (F1 = 80.13%), and fine-tuned open-source larger LLMs such as Qwen and LLaMA reach up to 94.49% F1. Finally, we also validate our approach on 178 real-world GitHub repositories, achieving an F1-score of 81.6% which demonstrates our approach's strong ability to generalize to in-the-wild scenarios.

cs.SE↗
arXiv2026

TriagerX: Dual Transformers for Bug Triaging Tasks with Content and Interaction Based Rankings

Pretrained Language Models or PLMs are transformer-based architectures that can be used in bug triaging tasks. PLMs can better capture token semantics than traditional Machine Learning (ML) models that rely on statistical features (e.g., TF-IDF, bag of words). However, PLMs may still attend to less relevant tokens in a bug report, which can impact their effectiveness. In addition, the model can be sub-optimal with its recommendations when the interaction history of developers around similar bugs is not taken into account. We designed TriagerX to address these limitations. First, to assess token semantics more reliably, we leverage a dual-transformer architecture. Unlike current state-of-the-art (SOTA) baselines that employ a single transformer architecture, TriagerX collects recommendations from two transformers with each offering recommendations via its last three layers. This setup generates a robust content-based ranking of candidate developers. TriagerX then refines this ranking by employing a novel interaction-based ranking methodology, which considers developers' historical interactions with similar fixed bugs. Across five datasets, TriagerX surpasses all nine transformer-based methods, including SOTA baselines, often improving Top-1 and Top-3 developer recommendation accuracy by over 10%. We worked with our large industry partner to successfully deploy TriagerX in their development environment. The partner required both developer and component recommendations, with components acting as proxies for team assignments-particularly useful in cases of developer turnover or team changes. We trained TriagerX on the partner's dataset for both tasks, and it outperformed SOTA baselines by up to 10% for component recommendations and 54% for developer recommendations.

cs.SE↗
arXiv2026

IssueGuard: Real-Time Secret Leak Prevention Tool for GitHub Issue Reports

GitHub and GitLab are widely used collaborative platforms whose issue-tracking systems contain large volumes of unstructured text, including logs, code snippets, and configuration examples. This creates a significant risk of accidental secret exposure, such as API keys and credentials, yet these platforms provide no mechanism to warn users before submission. We present \textsc{IssueGuard}, a tool for real-time detection and prevention of secret leaks in issue reports. Implemented as a Chrome extension, \textsc{IssueGuard} analyzes text as users type and combines regex-based candidate extraction with a fine-tuned CodeBERT model for contextual classification. This approach effectively separates real secrets from false positives and achieves an F1-score of 92.70\% on a benchmark dataset, outperforming traditional regex-based scanners. \textsc{IssueGuard} integrates directly into the web interface and continuously analyzes the issue editor, presenting clear visual warnings to help users avoid submitting sensitive data. The source code is publicly available at \href{https://github.com/disa-lab/IssueGuard}{https://github.com/disa-lab/IssueGuard} , and a demonstration video is available at \href{https://youtu.be/kvbWA8rr9cU}{https://youtu.be/kvbWA8rr9cU} .

cs.CR↗
arXiv2026

Evaluating the Environmental Impact of using SLMs and Prompt Engineering for Code Generation

The shift from cloud-hosted Large Language Models (LLMs) to locally deployed open-source Small Language Models (SLMs) has democratized AI-assisted coding; however, it has also decentralized the environmental footprint of AI. While prompting strategies - such as Chain-of-Thought and ReAct - serve as external mechanisms for optimizing code generation without modifying model parameters, their impact on energy consumption and carbon emissions remains largely invisible to developers. This paper presents the first systematic empirical study investigating how different prompt engineering strategies in SLM-based code generation impact code generation accuracy alongside sustainability factors. We evaluate six prominent prompting strategies across 11 open-source models (ranging from 1B to 34B parameters) using the HumanEval+ and MBPP+ benchmarks. By measuring Pass@1 accuracy alongside energy (kWh), carbon emissions (kgCO2eq), and inference latency, we reveal that sustainability often decouples from accuracy, allowing significant environmental optimizations without sacrificing performance. Our findings indicate that Chain-of-Thought, being a simpler prompting technique, can provide a near-optimal balance between reasoning capability and energy efficiency. Conversely, multi-sampling strategies often incur disproportionate costs for marginal gains. Finally, we identify grid carbon intensity as the dominant factor in deployment-time emissions, highlighting the need for practitioners to consider regional energy profiles. This work provides a quantitative foundation for "green" prompt engineering, enabling developers to align high-performance code generation with ecological responsibility.

cs.SE↗
arXiv2026

Engineering Pitfalls in AI Coding Tools: An Empirical Study of Bugs in Claude Code, Codex, and Gemini CLI

The rapid integration of Large Language Models (LLMs) into software development workflows has given rise to a new class of AI-assisted coding tools, such as Claude-Code, Codex, and Gemini CLIs. While promising significant productivity gains, the engineering process of building these tools, which sit at the complex intersection of traditional software engineering, AI system design, and human-computer interaction, is fraught with unique and poorly understood challenges. This paper presents the first empirical study of engineering pitfalls in building such tools, on a systematic, manual analysis of over 3.8K publicly reported bugs in the open-source repositories of three AI-assisted coding tools (i.e., Claude-Code, Codex, and Gemini CLIs) on GitHub. Specifically, we employ an open-coding methodology to manually examine the issue description, associated user discussions, and developer responses. Through this process, we categorize each bug along multiple dimensions, including bug type, bug location, root cause, and observed symptoms. This fine-grained annotation enables us to characterize common failure patterns and identify recurring engineering challenges. Our results show that more than 67% of the bugs in these tools are related to functionality. In terms of root causes, 36.9% of the bugs stem from API, integration, or configuration errors. Consequently, the most commonly observed symptoms reported by users are API errors (18.3%), terminal problems (14%), and command failures (12.7%). These bugs predominantly affect the tool invocation (37.2%) and command execution (24.7%) stages of the system workflow. Collectively, our findings provide a critical roadmap for developers seeking to design the next generation of reliable and robust AI coding assistants.

cs.SE↗
arXiv2025

VLDBench Evaluating Multimodal Disinformation with Regulatory Alignment

Detecting disinformation that blends manipulated text and images has become increasingly challenging, as AI tools make synthetic content easy to generate and disseminate. While most existing AI safety benchmarks focus on single modality misinformation (i.e., false content shared without intent to deceive), intentional multimodal disinformation, such as propaganda or conspiracy theories that imitate credible news, remains largely unaddressed. We introduce the Vision-Language Disinformation Detection Benchmark (VLDBench), the first large-scale resource supporting both unimodal (text-only) and multimodal (text + image) disinformation detection. VLDBench comprises approximately 62,000 labeled text-image pairs across 13 categories, curated from 58 news outlets. Using a semi-automated pipeline followed by expert review, 22 domain experts invested over 500 hours to produce high-quality annotations with substantial inter-annotator agreement. Evaluations of state-of-the-art Large Language Models (LLMs) and Vision-Language Models (VLMs) on VLDBench show that incorporating visual cues improves detection accuracy by 5 to 35 percentage points over text-only models. VLDBench provides data and code for evaluation, fine-tuning, and robustness testing to support disinformation analysis. Developed in alignment with AI governance frameworks (e.g., the MIT AI Risk Repository), VLDBench offers a principled foundation for advancing trustworthy disinformation detection in multimodal media. Project: https://vectorinstitute.github.io/VLDBench/ Dataset: https://huggingface.co/datasets/vector-institute/VLDBench Code: https://github.com/VectorInstitute/VLDBench

cs.CL↗
arXiv2025

Bias Testing and Mitigation in Black Box LLMs using Metamorphic Relations

The widespread deployment of Large Language Models (LLMs) has intensified concerns about subtle social biases embedded in their outputs. Existing guardrails often fail when faced with indirect or contextually complex bias-inducing prompts. To address these limitations, we propose a unified framework for both systematic bias evaluation and targeted mitigation. Our approach introduces six novel Metamorphic Relations (MRs) that, based on metamorphic testing principles, transform direct bias-inducing inputs into semantically equivalent yet adversarially challenging variants. These transformations enable an automated method for exposing hidden model biases: when an LLM responds inconsistently or unfairly across MR-generated variants, the underlying bias becomes detectable. We further show that the same MRs can be used to generate diverse bias-inducing samples for fine-tuning, directly linking the testing process to mitigation. Using six state-of-the-art LLMs - spanning open-source and proprietary models - and a representative subset of 385 questions from the 8,978-item BiasAsker benchmark covering seven protected groups, our MRs reveal up to 14% more hidden biases compared to existing tools. Moreover, fine-tuning with both original and MR-mutated samples significantly enhances bias resiliency, increasing safe response rates from 54.7% to over 88.9% across models. These results highlight metamorphic relations as a practical mechanism for improving fairness in conversational AI.

cs.SE↗
arXiv2025

LLM Assisted Coding with Metamorphic Specification Mutation Agent

Metamorphic Relations (MRs) serve as a foundational mechanism for generating semantically equivalent mutations. Software engineering has advanced significantly in recent years with the advent of Large Language Models (LLMs). However, the reliability of LLMs in software engineering is often compromised by ambiguities and inconsistencies due to improper user specification. To address this challenge, we present CodeMetaAgent (CMA), a metamorphic relation-driven LLM agent that systematically refines task specifications and generates semantically constrained test cases. Our proposed framework uses MRs with LLMs to improve generation consistency and reduce variability caused by specifications, unlike the traditional use of MRs as post validations. Our framework has been evaluated on the HumanEval-Pro, MBPP-Pro, and SWE-Bench_Lite datasets using the GPT-4o, Mistral Large, GPT-OSS, and Qwen3-Coder models. It improved code generation accuracy by up to 17% and achieved code coverage gains of up to 99.81%. These results show that metamorphic relations can be a simple but effective guide in assisting LLM-based software development.

cs.SE↗
arXiv2025

LLM For Loop Invariant Generation and Fixing: How Far Are We?

A loop invariant is a property of a loop that remains true before and after each execution of the loop. The identification of loop invariants is a critical step to support automated program safety assessment. Recent advancements in Large Language Models (LLMs) have demonstrated potential in diverse software engineering (SE) and formal verification tasks. However, we are not aware of the performance of LLMs to infer loop invariants. We report an empirical study of both open-source and closed-source LLMs of varying sizes to assess their proficiency in inferring inductive loop invariants for programs and in fixing incorrect invariants. Our findings reveal that while LLMs exhibit some utility in inferring and repairing loop invariants, their performance is substantially enhanced when supplemented with auxiliary information such as domain knowledge and illustrative examples. LLMs achieve a maximum success rate of 78\% in generating, but are limited to 16\% in repairing the invariant.

cs.SE↗
arXiv2025

PCS: Perceived Confidence Scoring of Black Box LLMs with Metamorphic Relations

Zero-shot LLMs are now also used for textual classification tasks, e.g., sentiment and bias detection in a sentence or article. However, their performance can be suboptimal in such data annotation tasks. We introduce a novel technique that evaluates an LLM's confidence for classifying a textual input by leveraging Metamorphic Relations (MRs). The MRs generate semantically equivalent yet textually divergent versions of the input. Following the principles of Metamorphic Testing (MT), the mutated versions are expected to have annotation labels similar to the input. By analyzing the consistency of an LLM's responses across these variations, we compute a perceived confidence score (PCS) based on the frequency of the predicted labels. PCS can be used for both single and multiple LLM settings (e.g., when multiple LLMs are vetted in a majority-voting setup). Empirical evaluation shows that our PCS-based approach improves the performance of zero-shot LLMs by 9.3% in textual classification tasks. When multiple LLMs are used in a majority-voting setup, we obtain a performance boost of 5.8% with PCS.

cs.CL↗
arXiv2025

An Empirical Study of Reasoning Steps in Thinking Code LLMs

Thinking Large Language Models (LLMs) generate explicit intermediate reasoning traces before final answers, potentially improving transparency, interpretability, and solution accuracy for code generation. However, the quality of these reasoning chains remains underexplored. We present a comprehensive empirical study examining the reasoning process and quality of thinking LLMs for code generation. We evaluate six state-of-the-art reasoning LLMs (DeepSeek-R1, OpenAI-o3-mini, Claude-3.7-Sonnet-Thinking, Gemini-2.0-Flash-Thinking, Gemini-2.5-Flash, and Qwen-QwQ) across 100 code generation tasks of varying difficulty from BigCodeBench. We quantify reasoning-chain structure through step counts and verbosity, conduct controlled step-budget adjustments, and perform a 21-participant human evaluation across three dimensions: efficiency, logical correctness, and completeness. Our step-count interventions reveal that targeted step increases can improve resolution rates for certain models/tasks, while modest reductions often preserve success on standard tasks, rarely on hard ones. Through systematic analysis, we develop a reasoning-problematic taxonomy, identifying completeness as the dominant failure mode. Task complexity significantly impacts reasoning quality; hard problems are substantially more prone to incompleteness than standard tasks. Our stability analysis demonstrates that thinking LLMs maintain consistent logical structures across computational effort levels and can self-correct previous errors. This study provides new insights into the strengths and limitations of current thinking LLMs in software engineering.

cs.AI↗
arXiv2025

Optimized Log Parsing with Syntactic Modifications

Logs provide valuable insights into system runtime and assist in software development and maintenance. Log parsing, which converts semi-structured log data into structured log data, is often the first step in automated log analysis. Given the wide range of log parsers utilizing diverse techniques, it is essential to evaluate them to understand their characteristics and performance. In this paper, we conduct a comprehensive empirical study comparing syntax- and semantic-based log parsers, as well as single-phase and two-phase parsing architectures. Our experiments reveal that semantic-based methods perform better at identifying the correct templates and syntax-based log parsers are 10 to 1,000 times more efficient and provide better grouping accuracy although they fall short in accurate template identification. Moreover, two-phase architecture consistently improves accuracy compared to single-phase architecture. Based on the findings of this study, we propose SynLog+, a template identification module that acts as the second phase in a two-phase log parsing architecture. SynLog+ improves the parsing accuracy of syntax-based and semantic-based log parsers by 236\% and 20\% on average, respectively, with virtually no additional runtime cost.

cs.SE↗