Nikita Mehrotra

Mohammad Jalili Torkamani, Abhinav Sharma, Nikita Mehrotra et al.

Production assertions are statements embedded in the code to help developers validate their assumptions about the code. They assist developers in debugging, provide valuable documentation, and enhance code comprehension. Current research in this area primarily focuses on assertion generation for unit tests using techniques, such as static analysis and deep learning. While these techniques have shown promise, they fall short when it comes to generating production assertions, which serve a different purpose. This preprint addresses the gap by introducing Assertify, an automated end-to-end tool that leverages Large Language Models (LLMs) and prompt engineering with few-shot learning to generate production assertions. By creating context-rich prompts, the tool emulates the approach developers take when creating production assertions for their code. To evaluate our approach, we compiled a dataset of 2,810 methods by scraping 22 mature Java repositories from GitHub. Our experiments demonstrate the effectiveness of few-shot learning by producing assertions with an average ROUGE-L score of 0.526, indicating reasonably high structural similarity with the assertions written by developers. This research demonstrates the potential of LLMs in automating the generation of production assertions that resemble the original assertions.

Nikita Mehrotra, Aayush Kumar, Sumit Gulwani et al.

We present a neurosymbolic approach, TEN, for extracting tabular data from semistructured input text. This task is particularly challenging for text input that does not use special delimiters consistently to separate columns and rows. Purely neural approaches perform poorly due to hallucinations and their inability to enforce hard constraints. TEN uses Structural Decomposition prompting - a specialized chain-of-thought prompting approach - on a large language model (LLM) to generate an initial table, and thereafter uses a symbolic checker to evaluate not only the well-formedness of that table, but also detect cases of hallucinations or forgetting. The output of the symbolic checker is processed by a critique-LLM to generate guidance for fixing the table, which is presented to the original LLM in a self-debug loop. Our extensive experiments demonstrate that TEN significantly outperforms purely neural baselines across multiple datasets and metrics, achieving significantly higher exact match accuracy and substantially reduced hallucination rates. A 21-participant user study further confirms that TEN's tables are rated significantly more accurate (mean score: 5.0 vs 4.3; p = 0.021), and are consistently preferred for ease of verification and correction, with participants favoring our method in over 60% of the cases.

Nikita Mehrotra, Navdha Agarwal, Piyush Gupta et al.

Code clones are duplicate code fragments that share (nearly) similar syntax or semantics. Code clone detection plays an important role in software maintenance, code refactoring, and reuse. A substantial amount of research has been conducted in the past to detect clones. A majority of these approaches use lexical and syntactic information to detect clones. However, only a few of them target semantic clones. Recently, motivated by the success of deep learning models in other fields, including natural language processing and computer vision, researchers have attempted to adopt deep learning techniques to detect code clones. These approaches use lexical information (tokens) and(or) syntactic structures like abstract syntax trees (ASTs) to detect code clones. However, they do not make sufficient use of the available structural and semantic information hence, limiting their capabilities. This paper addresses the problem of semantic code clone detection using program dependency graphs and geometric neural networks, leveraging the structured syntactic and semantic information. We have developed a prototype tool HOLMES, based on our novel approach, and empirically evaluated it on popular code clone benchmarks. Our results show that HOLMES performs considerably better than the other state-of-the-art tool, TBCCD. We also evaluated HOLMES on unseen projects and performed cross dataset experiments to assess the generalizability of HOLMES. Our results affirm that HOLMES outperforms TBCCD since most of the pairs that HOLMES detected were either undetected or suboptimally reported by TBCCD.