Papers
Topics
Authors
Recent
Gemini 2.5 Flash
Gemini 2.5 Flash
97 tokens/sec
GPT-4o
53 tokens/sec
Gemini 2.5 Pro Pro
43 tokens/sec
o3 Pro
4 tokens/sec
GPT-4.1 Pro
47 tokens/sec
DeepSeek R1 via Azure Pro
28 tokens/sec
2000 character limit reached

Measuring design compliance using neural language models -- an automotive case study (2208.13215v1)

Published 28 Aug 2022 in cs.SE

Abstract: As the modern vehicle becomes more software-defined, it is beginning to take significant effort to avoid serious regression in software design. This is because automotive software architects rely largely upon manual review of code to spot deviations from specified design principles. Such an approach is both inefficient and prone to error. In recent days, neural LLMs pre-trained on source code are beginning to be used for automating a variety of programming tasks. In this work, we extend the application of such a Programming LLM (PLM) to automate the assessment of design compliance. Using a PLM, we construct a system that assesses whether a set of query programs comply with Controller-Handler, a design pattern specified to ensure hardware abstraction in automotive control software. The assessment is based upon measuring whether the geometrical arrangement of query program embeddings, extracted from the PLM, aligns with that of a set of known implementations of the pattern. The level of alignment is then transformed into an interpretable measure of compliance. Using a controlled experiment, we demonstrate that our technique determines compliance with a precision of 92%. Also, using expert review to calibrate the automated assessment, we introduce a protocol to determine the nature of the violation, helping eventual refactoring. Results from this work indicate that neural LLMs can provide valuable assistance to human architects in assessing and fixing violations in automotive software design.

User Edit Pencil Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com
Authors (5)
  1. Dhasarathy Parthasarathy (8 papers)
  2. Cecilia Ekelin (1 paper)
  3. Anjali Karri (1 paper)
  4. Jiapeng Sun (3 papers)
  5. Panagiotis Moraitis (1 paper)
Citations (3)

Summary

We haven't generated a summary for this paper yet.