mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

JevVibe: Efficient Classification-Guided Secure Code Generation

arXiv 2609.34963 ↗First posted 28 Sep 2026cs.CR cs.AIcited by 0

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Large language models can generate functionally correct code that still contains security weaknesses, motivating repair pipelines that first diagnose a weakness type before deciding how to fix it. The Common Weakness Enumeration (CWE) provides a standardized vocabulary for such diagnoses, but asking an autoregressive language model to generate a CWE label and extracting it from the response raises questions about output validity, speed, and cost, as well as accuracy. We evaluate Jev, a decision model that instead selects directly from a declared set of candidates and returns a probability for each, against six open-weight autoregressive models and a frontier proprietary model, GPT-5.6-Sol, on a controlled 50-way CWE classification task over 1,916 CyberSecEval benchmark examples. Jev outperforms all six open-weight baselines on every classification and ranking metric, while its comparison with GPT-5.6-Sol depends on the metric: GPT-5.6-Sol achieves higher Top-1 accuracy and Macro-F1, whereas Jev achieves higher Top-3 and Top-5 accuracy and a nearly identical MRR, at 6.27× lower median API latency and 55.9× lower estimated API cost. We further build JevVibe, a diagnosis-guided repair agent that uses predicted CWE labels to repair code generated by Qwen2.5-Coder-32B-Instruct. With Jev providing the diagnosis, the agent increases the detector-measured security pass rate from 63.5% before repair to 70.7%, compared with 66.1% for LLM-guided repair. These results show that JevVibe is effective at improving the security of generated code, with Jev providing reliable and efficient CWE classification.

Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 8 of its 13 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 28 Sep 2026.

Builds on

8 of 13 references.

References · 8

  1. 2023Large Language Models for Code: Security Hardening and Adversarial Testingcited by 155
  2. 2023Purple Llama CyberSecEval: A Secure Coding Benchmark for Language Modelscited by 138
  3. 2024Instruction Tuning for Secure Code Generationcited by 68
  4. 2024Pre-training by Predicting Program Dependencies for Vulnerability Analysis Taskscited by 17
  5. 2024HexaCoder: Secure Code Generation via Oracle-Guided Synthetic Training Datacited by 16
  6. 2024Can LLM Prompting Serve as a Proxy for Static Analysis in Vulnerability Detectioncited by 4
  7. 2026GoodVibe: Security-by-Vibe for LLM-Based Code Generationcited by 4
  8. 2026Surgical Repair of Insecure Code Generation in LLMscited by 1

Built on by

Not cited yet.