Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 cited by

Fault Localization in Deep Learning-based Software: A System-level Approach

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 2411.08172 v1 pith:F5D5HEHM submitted 2024-11-12 cs.SE cs.LG

Fault Localization in Deep Learning-based Software: A System-level Approach

classification cs.SE cs.LG
keywords faultlocalizationfaultsfl4deepmodelsoftwareaccuracyapproach
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved
0 comments
read the original abstract

Over the past decade, Deep Learning (DL) has become an integral part of our daily lives. This surge in DL usage has heightened the need for developing reliable DL software systems. Given that fault localization is a critical task in reliability assessment, researchers have proposed several fault localization techniques for DL-based software, primarily focusing on faults within the DL model. While the DL model is central to DL components, there are other elements that significantly impact the performance of DL components. As a result, fault localization methods that concentrate solely on the DL model overlook a large portion of the system. To address this, we introduce FL4Deep, a system-level fault localization approach considering the entire DL development pipeline to effectively localize faults across the DL-based systems. In an evaluation using 100 faulty DL scripts, FL4Deep outperformed four previous approaches in terms of accuracy for three out of six DL-related faults, including issues related to data (84%), mismatched libraries between training and deployment (100%), and loss function (69%). Additionally, FL4Deep demonstrated superior precision and recall in fault localization for five categories of faults including three mentioned fault types in terms of accuracy, plus insufficient training iteration and activation function.

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Forward citations

Cited by 3 Pith papers

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

  1. Hierarchical Fault Detection and Diagnosis for Transformer Architectures

    cs.SE 2026-04 unverdicted novelty 7.0

    DEFault++ delivers automated hierarchical fault detection, categorization into 12 transformer-specific types, and root-cause diagnosis among 45 mechanisms on a new benchmark of 3,739 mutated instances, with AUROC >0.9...

  2. Hierarchical Fault Detection and Diagnosis for Transformer Architectures

    cs.SE 2026-04 unverdicted novelty 6.0

    DEFault++ applies hierarchical learning with a Fault Propagation Graph to detect, localize, and diagnose faults in transformers, improving F1 to 0.826-0.909 and developer repair accuracy from 57.1% to 83.3% on a new b...

  3. Real Faults in Model Context Protocol (MCP) Software: a Comprehensive Taxonomy

    cs.SE 2026-03 conditional novelty 6.0

    MCP server faults form five empirical categories—server setting, server/tool configuration, server/host configuration, documentation, and general programming—confirmed by a 41-practitioner survey.