MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4387735187 · doi:10.1145/3628159

Generation-based Differential Fuzzing for Deep Learning Libraries

2023· article· en· W4387735187 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueACM Transactions on Software Engineering and Methodology · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicSoftware Testing and Debugging Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersJST-Mirai ProgramScience, Technology and Innovation Commission of Shenzhen MunicipalityNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsFuzz testingComputer scienceContext (archaeology)Task (project management)Machine learningArtificial intelligenceDeep learningBenchmark (surveying)Software engineeringSoftwareProgramming language

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Deep learning (DL) libraries have become the key component in developing and deploying DL-based software nowadays. With the growing popularity of applying DL models in both academia and industry across various domains, any bugs inherent in the DL libraries can potentially cause unexpected server outcomes. As such, there is an urgent demand for improving the software quality of DL libraries. Although there are some existing approaches specifically designed for testing DL libraries, their focus is usually limited to one specific domain, such as computer vision (CV). It is still not very clear how the existing approaches perform in detecting bugs of different DL libraries regarding different task domains and to what extent. To bridge this gap, we first conduct an empirical study on four representative and state-of-the-art DL library testing approaches. Our empirical study results reveal that it is hard for existing approaches to generalize to other task domains. We also find that the test inputs generated by these approaches usually lack diversity, with only a few types of bugs. What is worse, the false-positive rate of existing approaches is also high ( up to 58% ). To address these issues, we propose a guided differential fuzzing approach based on generation , namely, Gandalf . To generate testing inputs across diverse task domains effectively, Gandalf adopts the context-free grammar to ensure validity and utilizes a Deep Q-Network to maximize the diversity. Gandalf also includes 15 metamorphic relations to make it possible for the generated test cases to generalize across different DL libraries. Such a design can decrease the false positives because of the semantic difference for different APIs. We evaluate the effectiveness of Gandalf on nine versions of three representative DL libraries, covering 309 operators from computer vision, natural language processing, and automated speech recognition. The evaluation results demonstrate that Gandalf can effectively and efficiently generate diverse test inputs. Meanwhile, Gandalf successfully detects five categories of bugs with only 3.1% false-positive rates. We report all 49 new unique bugs found during the evaluation to the DL libraries’ developers, and most of these bugs have been confirmed. Details about our empirical study and evaluation results are available on our project website. 1

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.663
Threshold uncertainty score0.677

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.141
GPT teacher head0.323
Teacher spread0.183 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it