arXiv:2607. 01859v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Safety training for large language models (LLMs) is conducted predominantly in English, leaving uncertain how well safety mechanisms generalize to low-resource languages and mixed-language code-switching.
By Joshua Adrian Cahyono
arXiv:2511. 20709v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) and LLM-based coding agents are now used to generate code from natural-language specifications, yet ensuring such code is both functionally correct and secure remains a challenge.
By Rupam Patir, Keyan Guo, Suvadra Barua, Abhijeet Pathak, Dinesh Gudimetla, Jiawei Guo, Hongxin Hu, Haipeng Cai
Safety training for large language models (LLMs) is conducted predominantly in English, leaving uncertain how well safety mechanisms generalize to low-resource languages and mixed-language code-switching. We show that this creates an epistemic gap in which models confidently generate harmful responses for inputs that fall outside the distribution of their safety training.
arXiv:2606. 31159v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Large Language Models (LLMs) are rapidly transforming software development, yet their use in security-critical contexts raises a key question: do models know when their generated code is insecure?
By Mohammed Latif Siddiq, Md. Nafiu Rahman, Joanna C. S. Santos
arXiv:2606. 30587v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Researchers and practitioners increasingly apply Large Language Models (LLMs) for automated vulnerability detection.
By Asif Shahriar, Hongyu Cai, Hadjer Benkraouda, Gang Wang, Z. Berkay Celik
arXiv:2407.02395v3 Announce Type: replace-cross
Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly used for program synthesis, yet they often generate code that is functionally plausible but ins...
By Jiexin Wang, Liuwen Cao, Xitong Luo, Yang Cao, Zhenghao Li, Yunyi Xiao, Mengchen Zhao, Adam Jatowt, Yi Cai
arXiv:2606. 16244v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Large language models routinely generate code with exploitable security flaws.
By Xiaoyun Xu, Lichao Wu, Jona te Lintelo, Siyu Zhang, Stjepan Picek
arXiv:2608. 12246v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Evaluating security vulnerability detection tools requires benchmark datasets with vulnerability-inducing commits (VICs) - the commits that first introduce vulnerabilities into codebases.
By Jin Lu, Xuening Han, Yang Zhong, Lin Tan, Kevin Luo, Andrew Gacek, Neha Rungta
arXiv:2606. 04739v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) have shown strong potential for automated software vulnerability detection, particularly in retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) settings.
By Sabrina Kaniewski, Fabian Schmidt, Tobias Heer
The thesis explores Introspective Uncertainty Estimation (IUE) for large language models (LLMs) in code generation, aiming to determine whether hidden-state representations can indicate functional correctness at both response and line levels. Using LiveCodeBench and BigCodeBench, the study finds that hidden states provide a strong signal for overall correctness, with static single-token probes performing best, while dynamic strategies offer no consistent advantage. Although line-level fault localization is more challenging, a conditional Top‑K ranking approach remains effective, suggesting a two‑stage workflow that first screens responses for risk and then prioritizes line‑level checks.
By Thomas Klassert
arXiv:2507. 22063v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Large Language Models (LLMs) for code generation (i.
By Wenjie Jacky Mo, Qin Liu, Xiaofei Wen, Dongwon Jung, Hadi Askari, Wenxuan Zhou, Zhe Zhao, Muhao Chen
Evaluating security vulnerability detection tools requires benchmark datasets with vulnerability-inducing commits (VICs) - the commits that first introduce vulnerabilities into codebases. VICs are essential for determining the full range of vulnerable software versions.