mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

AutoPruner: Transformer-Based Call Graph Pruning

arXiv 2209.03230 ↗First posted 7 Sep 2022cs.SE cs.AIcited by 11

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Constructing a static call graph requires trade-offs between soundness and precision. Program analysis techniques for constructing call graphs are unfortunately usually imprecise. To address this problem, researchers have recently proposed call graph pruning empowered by machine learning to post-process call graphs constructed by static analysis. A machine learning model is built to capture information from the call graph by extracting structural features for use in a random forest classifier. It then removes edges that are predicted to be false positives. Despite the improvements shown by machine learning models, they are still limited as they do not consider the source code semantics and thus often are not able to effectively distinguish true and false positives. In this paper, we present a novel call graph pruning technique, AutoPruner, for eliminating false positives in call graphs via both statistical semantic and structural analysis. Given a call graph constructed by traditional static analysis tools, AutoPruner takes a Transformer-based approach to capture the semantic relationships between the caller and callee functions associated with each edge in the call graph. To do so, AutoPruner fine-tunes a model of code that was pre-trained on a large corpus to represent source code based on descriptions of its semantics. Next, the model is used to extract semantic features from the functions related to each edge in the call graph. AutoPruner uses these semantic features together with the structural features extracted from the call graph to classify each edge via a feed-forward neural network. Our empirical evaluation on a benchmark dataset of real-world programs shows that AutoPruner outperforms the state-of-the-art baselines, improving on F-measure by up to 13% in identifying false-positive edges in a static call graph.

Key facts. Cited by 11 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 19 of its 63 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 7 Sep 2022.

Builds on

19 of 63 references.

References · 19

  1. 2017Attention Is All You Needcited by 59,932
  2. 2018BERT: Pre-training of Deep Bidirectional Transformers for Language Understandingcited by 40,204
  3. 2014Adam: A Method for Stochastic Optimizationcited by 36,960
  4. 2020Language Models are Few-Shot Learnerscited by 32,199
  5. 2016Semi-Supervised Classification with Graph Convolutional Networkscited by 11,282
  6. 2019XLNet: Generalized Autoregressive Pretraining for Language Understandingcited by 2,801
  7. 2020CodeBERT: A Pre-Trained Model for Programming and Natural Languagescited by 1,286
  8. 2019A Comprehensive Survey on Transfer Learningcited by 1,154
  9. 2021CodeXGLUE: A Machine Learning Benchmark Dataset for Code Understanding and Generationcited by 732
  10. 2018SequenceR: Sequence-to-Sequence Learning for End-to-End Program Repaircited by 144
  11. 2019A Neural Model for Generating Natural Language Summaries of Program Subroutinescited by 76
  12. 2019Pythia: AI-assisted Code Completion Systemcited by 54
7 more
  1. 2021Applying CodeBERT for Automated Program Repair of Java Simple Bugscited by 44
  2. 2019TypeWriter: Neural Type Prediction with Search-based Validationcited by 32
  3. 2020Typilus: Neural Type Hintscited by 29
  4. 2020InferCode: Self-Supervised Learning of Code Representations by Predicting Subtreescited by 23
  5. 2018Oreo: Detection of Clones in the Twilight Zonecited by 19
  6. 2021PyCG: Practical Call Graph Generation in Pythoncited by 16
  7. 2021Static Inference Meets Deep Learning: A Hybrid Type Inference Approach for Pythoncited by 12

Built on by

Cited by year

Citing papers per year: 2023: 3; 2024: 5; 2025: 3.

11 papers.