MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4409604977 · doi:10.61091/jcmcc127b-317

Optimizing Software Supply Chain Vulnerability Mining and Remediation Paths Using Deep Learning Techniques

2025· article· en· W4409604977 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.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Combinatorial Mathematics and Combinatorial Computing · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicSoftware System Performance and Reliability
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersChina National Offshore Oil Corporation
KeywordsVulnerability (computing)Environmental remediationSupply chainComputer scienceSoftwareArtificial intelligenceEnvironmental scienceBusinessComputer securityContamination

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper constructs an overall framework for vulnerability mining, covering the whole process from code collection to vulnerability remediation.The word vector technique is used to transform code fragments into vector form, thus preserving the semantic information of the code.A vulnerability mining system based on semantic graph of source code is further designed, which generates a semantic graph of code by constructing an abstract syntax tree (SAT), and analyzes the semantic graph by using graph neural network to accurately locate potential vulnerabilities.At the same time, a vulnerability repair method based on thought chain is proposed.The results show that the model in this paper can accurately mine the vulnerabilities of web service software, and it consumes short latency and has strong stability.The results of web service software vulnerability detection show that the accuracy rate of the model always stays above 85% under different network structures.In addition, this paper obtains that the integration degree centrality measure and 60 iteration rounds have the best effect on the detection of vulnerabilities of the model.Finally, the vulnerability repair experiments show that at Beams=15, the model in this paper repairs each vulnerability function with a PPP metric of 61.52% and an average time of 3.168 seconds, which is the best for vulnerability repair.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.523
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.262
Teacher spread0.251 · 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