Meiziniu Li

Jialun Cao, Meiziniu Li, Xiao Chen et al.

As Deep Learning (DL) systems are widely deployed for mission-critical applications, debugging such systems becomes essential. Most existing works identify and repair suspicious neurons on the trained Deep Neural Network (DNN), which, unfortunately, might be a detour. Specifically, several existing studies have reported that many unsatisfactory behaviors are actually originated from the faults residing in DL programs. Besides, locating faulty neurons is not actionable for developers, while locating the faulty statements in DL programs can provide developers with more useful information for debugging. Though a few recent studies were proposed to pinpoint the faulty statements in DL programs or the training settings (e.g. too large learning rate), they were mainly designed based on predefined rules, leading to many false alarms or false negatives, especially when the faults are beyond their capabilities. In view of these limitations, in this paper, we proposed DeepFD, a learning-based fault diagnosis and localization framework which maps the fault localization task to a learning problem. In particular, it infers the suspicious fault types via monitoring the runtime features extracted during DNN model training and then locates the diagnosed faults in DL programs. It overcomes the limitations by identifying the root causes of faults in DL programs instead of neurons and diagnosing the faults by a learning approach instead of a set of hard-coded rules. The evaluation exhibits the potential of DeepFD. It correctly diagnoses 52% faulty DL programs, compared with around half (27%) achieved by the best state-of-the-art works. Besides, for fault localization, DeepFD also outperforms the existing works, correctly locating 42% faulty programs, which almost doubles the best result (23%) achieved by the existing works.

Meiziniu Li, Jialun Cao, Yongqiang Tian et al.

Recent deep learning (DL) applications are mostly built on top of DL libraries. The quality assurance of these libraries is critical to the dependable deployment of DL applications. Techniques have been proposed to generate various DL models and apply them to test these libraries. However, their test effectiveness is constrained by the diversity of layer API calls in their generated DL models. Our study reveals that these techniques can cover at most 34.1% layer inputs, 25.9% layer parameter values, and 15.6% layer sequences. As a result, we find that many bugs arising from specific layer API calls (i.e., specific layer inputs, parameter values, or layer sequences) can be missed by existing techniques. Because of this limitation, we propose COMET to effectively generate DL models with diverse layer API calls for DL library testing. COMET: (1) designs a set of mutation operators and a coverage-based search algorithm to diversify layer inputs, layer parameter values, and layer sequences in DL models. (2) proposes a model synthesis method to boost the test efficiency without compromising the layer API call diversity. Our evaluation result shows that COMET outperforms baselines by covering twice as many layer inputs (69.7% vs. 34.1%), layer parameter values (50.2% vs. 25.9%), and layer sequences (39.0% vs. 15.6%) as those by the state-of-the-art. Moreover, COMET covers 3.4% more library branches than those by existing techniques. Finally, COMET detects 32 new bugs in the latest version of eight popular DL libraries, including TensorFlow and MXNet, with 21 of them confirmed by DL library developers and 7 of those confirmed bugs have been fixed by developers.

Jialun Cao, Yaojie Lu, Meiziniu Li et al.

The research in AI-based formal mathematical reasoning has shown an unstoppable growth trend. These studies have excelled in mathematical competitions like IMO and have made significant progress. This paper focuses on formal verification, an immediate application scenario of formal reasoning, and breaks it down into sub-tasks. We constructed 18k high-quality instruction-response pairs across five formal specification languages (Coq, Lean4, Dafny, ACSL, and TLA+) by distilling gpt-4o and evaluated against ten open-sourced LLMs, including recent popular DeepSeek-R1. We also fine-tuned several 7~8B small models to achieve comparable performance with Deepseek-R1-671B. Interestingly, we observed that fine-tuning with formal data also enhances mathematics, reasoning, and coding capabilities. Fine-tuned models are released at https: //huggingface.co/fm-universe.

Meiziniu Li, Dongze Li, Jianmeng Liu et al.

Performance optimization of AI infrastructure is key to the fast adoption of large language models (LLMs). The PyTorch compiler (torch.compile), a core optimization tool for deep learning (DL) models (including LLMs), has received due attention. However, torch.compile is prone to correctness bugs, which cause incorrect outputs of compiled DL models without triggering exceptions, crashes, or warnings. These bugs pose a serious threat to the reliability of downstream LLM applications. Data from the PyTorch community shows that 19.2% of high-priority issues are incorrect outputs of compiled DL models induced by torch.compile bugs, the second-most-common bug category (only behind program crashes at 19.57%). However, no systematic study has been conducted to specifically characterize and thereby detect these bugs. In this paper, we present the first empirical study of the correctness bugs in torch.compile, examine their characteristics, and assess the effectiveness of existing fuzzers in detecting them. Based on our findings, we propose a proof-of-concept testing technique named AlignGuard, tailored specifically for detecting correctness bugs in torch.compile. AlignGuard incorporates bug characteristics distilled from our empirical study, applying LLM-based test mutation to existing test cases for correctness bug detection. At the time of writing, AlignGuard has successfully detected 23 new correctness bugs in recent torch.compile. All these bugs have been confirmed or fixed by the PyTorch development team, and over half (14/23) of them are even marked as high-priority bugs, underscoring the usefulness of our technique.

Meiziniu Li, Dongze Li, Jianmeng Liu et al.

Differential testing offers a promising strategy to alleviate the test oracle problem by comparing the test results between alternative implementations. However, existing differential testing techniques for deep learning (DL) libraries are limited by the key challenges of finding alternative implementations (called counterparts) for a given API and subsequently generating diverse test inputs. To address the two challenges, this paper introduces DLLens, an LLM-enhanced differential testing technique for DL libraries. To address the first challenge, DLLens incorporates an LLM-based counterpart synthesis workflow, with the insight that the counterpart of a given DL library API's computation could be successfully synthesized through certain composition and adaptation of the APIs from another DL library. To address the second challenge, DLLens incorporates a static analysis technique that extracts the path constraints from the implementations of a given API and its counterpart to guide diverse test input generation. The extraction is facilitated by LLM's knowledge of the concerned DL library and its upstream libraries. We evaluate DLLens on two popular DL libraries, TensorFlow and PyTorch. Our evaluation shows that DLLens synthesizes counterparts for 1.84 times as many APIs as those found by state-of-the-art techniques on these libraries. Moreover, under the same time budget, DLLens covers 7.23% more branches and detects 1.88 times as many bugs as state-of-the-art techniques on 200 randomly sampled APIs. DLLens has successfully detected 71 bugs in recent TensorFlow and PyTorch libraries. Among them, 59 are confirmed by developers, including 46 confirmed as previously unknown bugs, and 10 of these previously unknown bugs have been fixed in the latest version of TensorFlow and PyTorch.

Jialun Cao, Meiziniu Li, Yeting Li et al.

Machine translation has wide applications in daily life. In mission-critical applications such as translating official documents, incorrect translation can have unpleasant or sometimes catastrophic consequences. This motivates recent research on testing methodologies for machine translation systems. Existing methodologies mostly rely on metamorphic relations designed at the textual level (e.g., Levenshtein distance) or syntactic level (e.g., the distance between grammar structures) to determine the correctness of translation results. However, these metamorphic relations do not consider whether the original and translated sentences have the same meaning (i.e., Semantic similarity). Therefore, in this paper, we propose SemMT, an automatic testing approach for machine translation systems based on semantic similarity checking. SemMT applies round-trip translation and measures the semantic similarity between the original and translated sentences. Our insight is that the semantics expressed by the logic and numeric constraint in sentences can be captured using regular expressions (or deterministic finite automata) where efficient equivalence/similarity checking algorithms are available. Leveraging the insight, we propose three semantic similarity metrics and implement them in SemMT. The experiment result reveals SemMT can achieve higher effectiveness compared with state-of-the-art works, achieving an increase of 21% and 23% on accuracy and F-Score, respectively. We also explore potential improvements that can be achieved when proper combinations of metrics are adopted. Finally, we discuss a solution to locate the suspicious trip in round-trip translation, which may shed lights on further exploration.