Static analysis plays a crucial role in software vulnerability detection, yet faces a persistent precision-scalability tradeoff. In large codebases like the Linux kernel, traditional static analysis tools often generate excessive false positives due to simplified vulnerability modeling and overapproximation of path and data constraints. While large language models (LLMs) demonstrate promising code understanding capabilities, their direct application to program analysis remains unreliable due to inherent reasoning limitations. We introduce BugLens, a post-refinement framework that significantly enhances static analysis precision for bug detection. BugLens guides LLMs through structured reasoning steps to assess security impact and validate constraints from the source code. When evaluated on Linux kernel taint-style bugs detected by static analysis tools, BugLens improves precision approximately 7-fold (from 0.10 to 0.72), substantially reducing false positives while uncovering four previously unreported vulnerabilities. Our results demonstrate that a well-structured, fully automated LLM-based workflow can effectively complement and enhance traditional static analysis techniques.

Generating fake data is an essential dimension of modern software testing, as demonstrated by the number and significance of data faking libraries. Yet, developers of faking libraries cannot keep up with the wide range of data to be generated for different natural languages and domains. In this paper, we assess the ability of generative AI for generating test data in different domains. We design three types of prompts for Large Language Models (LLMs), which perform test data generation tasks at different levels of integrability: 1) raw test data generation, 2) synthesizing programs in a specific language that generate useful test data, and 3) producing programs that use state-of-the-art faker libraries. We evaluate our approach by prompting LLMs to generate test data for 11 domains. The results show that LLMs can successfully generate realistic test data generators in a wide range of domains at all three levels of integrability.

We integrate with lots of other tools including Pandas, AWS Sagemaker, MLflow, Flask, Ray, RAPIDS, Apache Kafka, and more. If you have any questions, comments, or just want to hang out with us, please join our Slack Community. In addition to joining the Slack Community, you can also help this project by giving us a in the upper right corner of this page. They capture key statistical properties of data, such as the distribution (far beyond simple mean, median, and standard deviation measures), the number of missing values, and a wide range of configurable custom metrics. By capturing these summary statistics, we are able to accurately represent the data and enable all of the use cases described in the introduction.

The increasing usage of machine learning models raises the question of the reliability of these models. The current practice of testing with limited data is often insufficient. In this paper, we provide a framework for automated test data synthesis to test black-box ML/DL models. We address an important challenge of generating realistic user-controllable data with model agnostic coverage criteria to test a varied set of properties, essentially to increase trust in machine learning models. We experimentally demonstrate the effectiveness of our technique.

When data contains measurement errors, it is necessary to make assumptions relating the observed, erroneous data to the unobserved true phenomena of interest. These assumptions should be justifiable on substantive grounds, but are often motivated by mathematical convenience, for the sake of exactly identifying the target of inference. We adopt the view that it is preferable to present bounds under justifiable assumptions than to pursue exact identification under dubious ones. To that end, we demonstrate how a broad class of modeling assumptions involving discrete variables, including common measurement error and conditional independence assumptions, can be expressed as linear constraints on the parameters of the model. We then use linear programming techniques to produce sharp bounds for factual and counterfactual distributions under measurement error in such models. We additionally propose a procedure for obtaining outer bounds on non-linear models. Our method yields sharp bounds in a number of important settings -- such as the instrumental variable scenario with measurement error -- for which no bounds were previously known.

If you have worked with financial or accounting data, then you know that a $10 discrepancy today can become a $100,000 tomorrow. An error in a data storage system or business intelligence report might seem small at first. It can be tempting for analysts to ignore it, or fudge the numbers for the month. Maybe they will tell themselves "I will fix it later". If you have worked with financial or accounting data, then you know that a $10 discrepancy today can become a $100,000 tomorrow.