REVIEW 1 cited by
Fast, Fine-Grained Equivalence Checking for Neural Decompilers
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
read the original abstract
Neural decompilers are machine learning models that reconstruct the source code from an executable program. Critical to the lifecycle of any machine learning model is an evaluation of its effectiveness. However, existing techniques for evaluating neural decompilation models have substantial weaknesses, especially when it comes to showing the correctness of the neural decompiler's predictions. To address this, we introduce codealign, a novel instruction-level code equivalence technique designed for neural decompilers. We provide a formal definition of a relation between equivalent instructions, which we term an equivalence alignment. We show how codealign generates equivalence alignments, then evaluate codealign by comparing it with symbolic execution. Finally, we show how the information codealign provides-which parts of the functions are equivalent and how well the variable names match-is substantially more detailed than existing state-of-the-art evaluation metrics, which report unitless numbers measuring similarity.
Forward citations
Cited by 1 Pith paper
-
Idioms: Neural Decompilation With Joint Code and Type Definition Prediction
Finetuned LLMs that jointly generate decompiled C code and user-defined type definitions outperform prior neural decompilers on ExeBench and the new Realtype dataset.
Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.