Papers by Haoye Tian
SeCuRepair: Semantics-Aligned, Curriculum-Driven, and Reasoning-Enhanced Vulnerability Repair Framework (2026.acl-long)
Copied to clipboard
Chengran Yang, Ting Zhang, Jinfeng Jiang, Xin Zhou, Haoye Tian, Mingzhe Du, Jieke Shi, Junkai Chen, Yikun Li, Eng Lieh Ouh, Lwin Khin Shar, David Lo
| Challenge: | Existing methods for automating vulnerability repair suffer from syntactic overfitting . nvd published 49,230 Common Vulnerabilities and Exposures (CVE) records in 2025 alone . |
| Approach: | They propose a semantic-aware reward framework that optimizes for code semantic equivalence rather than lexical mimicry. |
| Outcome: | The proposed framework outperforms state-of-the-art frameworks on repository-level splits . it incorporates expert-aligned reasoning mechanism that grounds patch generation in structured diagnosis. |
CodeAgent: Autonomous Communicative Agents for Code Review (2024.emnlp-main)
Copied to clipboard
Xunzhu Tang, Kisub Kim, Yewei Song, Cedric Lothritz, Bei Li, Saad Ezzini, Haoye Tian, Jacques Klein, Tegawendé Bissyandé
| Challenge: | Existing methods for code review rely on single input-output generative models and thus lack the collaborative nature of code review. |
| Approach: | They propose a multi-agent Large Language Model (LLM) system for code review automation that incorporates a supervisory agent to ensure that all the agents’ contributions address the initial review question. |
| Outcome: | The proposed system detects inconsistencies between code changes and commit messages, identify vulnerabilities, validates code style adherence, and suggests code revisions. |
SecureVibeBench: Benchmarking Secure Vibe Coding of AI Agents via Reconstructing Vulnerability-Introducing Scenarios (2026.acl-long)
Copied to clipboard
Junkai Chen, Huihui Huang, Yunbo Lyu, Junwen An, Jieke Shi, Chengran Yang, Ting Zhang, Haoye Tian, Yikun Li, Zhenhao Li, Xin Zhou, Xing Hu, David Lo
| Challenge: | Existing benchmarks fail to capture scenarios in which vulnerabilities are introduced by humans . we evaluate 5 popular code agents supported by 5 LLMs on SecureVibeBench . |
| Approach: | They propose a benchmarking tool that compares 105 C/C++ secure coding tasks . they use real-world open-source vulnerabilities and a comprehensive evaluation tool . |
| Outcome: | The proposed benchmarks show that code agents struggle to produce correct and secure code . the best performing agent produces merely 23.8% correct and secured solutions . |