REVIEW 1 cited by
Utilizing Precise and Complete Code Context to Guide LLM in Automatic False Positive Mitigation
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
Utilizing Precise and Complete Code Context to Guide LLM in Automatic False Positive Mitigation
read the original abstract
Static Application Security Testing (SAST) tools are critical to software quality, identifying potential code issues early in development. However, they often produce false positive warnings that require manual review, slowing down development. Thus, automating false positive mitigation (FPM) is essential. The advent of Large Language Models (LLMs), with their strong abilities in natural language and code understanding, offers promising avenues for FPM. Yet current LLM-based FPM method faces two major limitations: 1. The warning-related code snippets extracted are overly broad and cluttered with irrelevant control/data flows, reducing precision; 2. Critical code contexts are missing, leading to incomplete representations that can mislead LLMs and cause inaccurate assessments. To overcome these limitations, we propose LLM4FPM , a lightweight and efficient false positive mitigation framework. It features eCPG-Slicer, which builds an extended code property graph (eCPG) to extract precise line-level code contexts for warnings. Furthermore, the integrated FARF algorithm builds a file reference graph to identify all files that are relevant to warnings in linear time. This enables eCPG-Slicer to obtain rich contextual information without resorting to expensive whole-program analysis. LLM4FPM outperforms the existing method on the Juliet dataset (F1 > 99% across various Common Weakness Enumerations) and improves label accuracy on the D2A dataset to 86%. By leveraging a lightweight open-source LLM, LLM4FPM can significantly save inspection costs up to \$2758 per run (\$0.384 per warning) on Juliet with an average inspection time of 4.7s per warning. Moreover, real-world tests on popular C/C++ projects demonstrate its practicality.
Forward citations
Cited by 1 Pith paper
-
Using LLMs to Adjudicate Static-Analysis Alerts with Error Reduction Techniques
Mid-tier reasoning LLMs with consistency checks and LLM reasoning evaluation adjudicate static-analysis alerts at ≥98% recall and ≥94.8% specificity across Juliet, FormAI, and SV-COMP.
discussion (0)
Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.