Pith. sign in

REVIEW 1 cited by

Prompting for Automatic Log Template Extraction

Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.

SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event

T0 review · schema-true

One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.

pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp

arxiv 2307.09950 v3 pith:CAWOPM5N submitted 2023-07-19 cs.SE

classification cs.SE
keywords divlogparsingtemplatelogsaccuracyparserspromptcandidates
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal
0 comments
read the original abstract

Log parsing, which involves log template extraction from semi-structured logs to produce structured logs, is the first and the most critical step in automated log analysis. However, current log parsers suffer from limited effectiveness for two reasons. First, traditional data-driven log parsers solely rely on heuristics or handcrafted features designed by domain experts, which may not consistently perform well on logs from diverse systems. Second, existing supervised log parsers require model tuning, which is often limited to fixed training samples and causes sub-optimal performance across the entire log source. To address this limitation, we propose DivLog, an effective log parsing framework based on the in-context learning (ICL) ability of large language models (LLMs). Specifically, before log parsing, DivLog samples a small amount of offline logs as candidates by maximizing their diversity. Then, during log parsing, DivLog selects five appropriate labeled candidates as examples for each target log and constructs them into a prompt. By mining the semantics of examples in the prompt, DivLog generates a target log template in a training-free manner. In addition, we design a straightforward yet effective prompt format to extract the output and enhance the quality of the generated log templates. We conducted experiments on 16 widely-used public datasets. The results show that DivLog achieves (1) 98.1% Parsing Accuracy, (2) 92.1% Precision Template Accuracy, and (3) 92.9% Recall Template Accuracy on average, exhibiting state-of-the-art performance.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. LogBabylon: A Unified Framework for Cross-Log File Integration and Analysis

    cs.SE 2024-12 reject novelty 4.0 of 10

    The paper proposes an LLM+RAG framework for log parsing and analysis, but its evaluation contradicts the claimed performance gains.

Pith tools