mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

Automated Software Vulnerability Assessment with Concept Drift

arXiv 2103.11316 ↗First posted 21 Mar 2021cs.SE cs.CRcited by 15

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Software Engineering researchers are increasingly using Natural Language Processing (NLP) techniques to automate Software Vulnerabilities (SVs) assessment using the descriptions in public repositories. However, the existing NLP-based approaches suffer from concept drift. This problem is caused by a lack of proper treatment of new (out-of-vocabulary) terms for the evaluation of unseen SVs over time. To perform automated SVs assessment with concept drift using SVs' descriptions, we propose a systematic approach that combines both character and word features. The proposed approach is used to predict seven Vulnerability Characteristics (VCs). The optimal model of each VC is selected using our customized time-based cross-validation method from a list of eight NLP representations and six well-known Machine Learning models. We have used the proposed approach to conduct large-scale experiments on more than 100,000 SVs in the National Vulnerability Database (NVD). The results show that our approach can effectively tackle the concept drift issue of the SVs' descriptions reported from 2000 to 2018 in NVD even without retraining the model. In addition, our approach performs competitively compared to the existing word-only method. We also investigate how to build compact concept-drift-aware models with much fewer features and give some recommendations on the choice of classifiers and NLP representations for SVs assessment.

Key facts. Cited by 15 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). First posted on arXiv 21 Mar 2021.

Builds on

No reference list yet.

Built on by

Cited by year

Citing papers per year: 2021: 3; 2022: 1; 2023: 0; 2024: 8; 2025: 3.

15 papers.

Sort:

By area:

  1. 2021A Survey on Data-driven Software Vulnerability Assessment and Prioritizationcited by 18
  2. 2021DeepCVA: Automated Commit-level Vulnerability Assessment with Deep Multi-task Learningcited by 11
  3. 2024Are Latent Vulnerabilities Hidden Gems for Software Vulnerability Prediction? An Empirical Studycited by 9
  4. 2025LLMSecConfig: An LLM-Based Approach for Fixing Software Container Misconfigurationscited by 9
  5. 2024Software Vulnerability Prediction in Low-Resource Languages: An Empirical Study of CodeBERT and ChatGPTcited by 8
  6. 2021Automated Security Assessment for the Internet of Thingscited by 6
  7. 2024Mitigating Data Imbalance for Software Vulnerability Assessment: Does Data Augmentation Help?cited by 6
  8. 2024Automated Code-centric Software Vulnerability Assessment: How Far Are We? An Empirical Study in C/C++cited by 6
  9. 2024Automatic Data Labeling for Software Vulnerability Prediction Models: How Far Are We?cited by 6
  10. 2024EvalSVA: Multi-Agent Evaluators for Next-Gen Software Vulnerability Assessmentcited by 6
  11. 2022On the Use of Fine-grained Vulnerable Code Statements for Software Vulnerability Assessment Modelscited by 5
  12. 2024A Survey of Source Code Representations for Machine Learning-Based Cybersecurity Taskscited by 4
3 more
  1. 2024SpamDam: Towards Privacy-Preserving and Adversary-Resistant SMS Spam Detectioncited by 3
  2. 2025A Match Made in Heaven? AI-driven Matching of Vulnerabilities and Security Unit Testscited by 0
  3. 2025Resource-Efficient Automatic Software Vulnerability Assessment via Knowledge Distillation and Particle Swarm Optimizationcited by 0