Krishna Narasimhan

SE
h-index5
4papers
41citations
Novelty36%
AI Score27

4 Papers

3.6SEAug 20, 2021Code
Fex: Assisted Identification of Domain Features from C Programs

Patrick Müller, Krishna Narasimhan, Mira Mezini

Modern software typically performs more than one functionality. These functionalities or features are not always organized in a way for modules representing these features to be used individually. Many software engineering approaches like programming language constructs, or product line visualization techniques have been proposed to organize projects as modules. Unfortunately, much legacy software suffer from years or decades of improper coding practices that leave the modules in the code almost undetectable. In such scenarios, a desirable requirement is to identify modules representing different features to be extracted. In this paper, we propose a novel approach that combines information retrieval and program analysis approaches to allow domain experts to identify slices of the program that represent modules using natural language search terms. We evaluate our approach by building a proof of concept tool in C, and extract modules from open source projects.

8.4SEDec 14, 2023
Towards Trustworthy AI Software Development Assistance

Daniel Maninger, Krishna Narasimhan, Mira Mezini

It is expected that in the near future, AI software development assistants will play an important role in the software industry. However, current software development assistants tend to be unreliable, often producing incorrect, unsafe, or low-quality code. We seek to resolve these issues by introducing a holistic architecture for constructing, training, and using trustworthy AI software development assistants. In the center of the architecture, there is a foundational LLM trained on datasets representative of real-world coding scenarios and complex software architectures, and fine-tuned on code quality criteria beyond correctness. The LLM will make use of graph-based code representations for advanced semantic comprehension. We envision a knowledge graph integrated into the system to provide up-to-date background knowledge and to enable the assistant to provide appropriate explanations. Finally, a modular framework for constrained decoding will ensure that certain guarantees (e.g., for correctness and security) hold for the generated code.

22.1SEJun 17, 2024Code
A Critical Study of What Code-LLMs (Do Not) Learn

Abhinav Anand, Shweta Verma, Krishna Narasimhan et al.

Large Language Models trained on code corpora (code-LLMs) have demonstrated impressive performance in various coding assistance tasks. However, despite their increased size and training dataset, code-LLMs still have limitations such as suggesting codes with syntactic errors, variable misuse etc. Some studies argue that code-LLMs perform well on coding tasks because they use self-attention and hidden representations to encode relations among input tokens. However, previous works have not studied what code properties are not encoded by code-LLMs. In this paper, we conduct a fine-grained analysis of attention maps and hidden representations of code-LLMs. Our study indicates that code-LLMs only encode relations among specific subsets of input tokens. Specifically, by categorizing input tokens into syntactic tokens and identifiers, we found that models encode relations among syntactic tokens and among identifiers, but they fail to encode relations between syntactic tokens and identifiers. We also found that fine-tuned models encode these relations poorly compared to their pre-trained counterparts. Additionally, larger models with billions of parameters encode significantly less information about code than models with only a few hundred million parameters.

3.8CRMay 11, 2021
Dealing with Variability in API Misuse Specification

Rodrigo Bonifacio, Stefan Krüger, Krishna Narasimhan et al.

APIs are the primary mechanism for developers to gain access to externally defined services and tools. However, previous research has revealed API misuses that violate the contract of APIs to be prevalent. Such misuses can have harmful consequences, especially in the context of cryptographic libraries. Various API misuse detectors have been proposed to address this issue including CogniCrypt, one of the most versatile of such detectors and that uses a language CrySL to specify cryptographic API usage contracts. Nonetheless, existing approaches to detect API misuse had not been designed for systematic reuse, ignoring the fact that different versions of a library, different versions of a platform, and different recommendations or guidelines might introduce variability in the correct usage of an API. Yet, little is known about how such variability impacts the specification of the correct API usage. This paper investigates this question by analyzing the impact of various sources of variability on widely used Java cryptographic libraries including JCA, Bouncy Castle, and Google Tink. The results of our investigation show that sources of variability like new versions of the API and security standards significantly impact the specifications. We then use the insights gained from our investigation to motivate an extension to the CrySL language named MetaCrySL, which builds on meta programming concepts. We evaluate MetaCrySL by specifying usage rules for a family of Android versions and illustrate that MetaCrySL can model all forms of variability we identified and drastically reduce the size of a family of specifications for the correct usage of cryptographic APIs