Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 cited by

R2Vul: Learning to Reason about Software Vulnerabilities with Reinforcement Learning and Structured Reasoning Distillation

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 2504.04699 v2 pith:6HRB2ER3 submitted 2025-04-07 cs.SE cs.AIcs.CL

classification cs.SEcs.AIcs.CL
keywords r2vulreasoningdetectionlearningllmsmodelrlaifvulnerability
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

0 comments
read the original abstract

Large language models (LLMs) have shown promising performance in software vulnerability detection, yet their reasoning capabilities remain unreliable. We propose R2Vul, a method that combines reinforcement learning from AI feedback (RLAIF) and structured reasoning distillation to teach small code LLMs to detect vulnerabilities while generating security-aware explanations. Unlike prior chain-of-thought and instruction tuning approaches, R2Vul rewards well-founded over deceptively plausible vulnerability explanations through RLAIF, which results in more precise detection and high-quality reasoning generation. To support RLAIF, we construct the first multilingual preference dataset for vulnerability detection, comprising 18,000 high-quality samples in C\#, JavaScript, Java, Python, and C. We evaluate R2Vul across five programming languages and against four static analysis tools, eight state-of-the-art LLM-based baselines, and various fine-tuning approaches. Our results demonstrate that a 1.5B R2Vul model exceeds the performance of its 32B teacher model and leading commercial LLMs such as Claude-4-Opus. Furthermore, we introduce a lightweight calibration step that reduces false positive rates under varying imbalanced data distributions. Finally, through qualitative analysis, we show that both LLM and human evaluators consistently rank R2Vul model's reasoning higher than other reasoning-based baselines.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 4 Pith papers

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

  1. Vul4Py: Benchmarking Automated Vulnerability Repair in Python with Paired Exploit and Functional Oracles

    cs.SE 2026-08 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    Vul4Py gives 100 real Python vulnerabilities a paired exploit-and-functional oracle, and on this benchmark agentic repair systems outperform direct prompting and a specialized tool by a wide margin.

  2. DREA: Decoupled Reasoning and Exploration Agents for Repository-Level Vulnerability Detection

    cs.CR 2026-07 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    DREA improves repository-level vulnerability detection by coupling an LLM planner that forms hypotheses with a cheap local explorer that gathers cross-file evidence, lifting paired accuracy from 19-26% to 30-42% at mu...

  3. Neuro-Symbolic Reasoning for Vulnerability Detection

    cs.SE 2026-07 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    Separating LLM fact filtering from Lean 4 obligation discharge improves vulnerability-detection F1 in all fifteen CWE×backend settings, especially doubling recall on double-free.

  4. VULPO: Context-Aware Vulnerability Detection via On-Policy LLM Optimization

    cs.CR 2025-11 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    A 4B LLM trained with judge-scored, difficulty-scaled on-policy RL reaches F1 70.45 on context-aware C/C++ vulnerability detection, comparable to DeepSeek-V3.1, with the caveat that the same judge provided the trainin...

Pith tools