NESA: Relational Neuro-Symbolic Static Program Analysis
Chengpeng Wang, Yifei Gao, Wuqi Zhang, Xuwei Liu, Jinyao Guo, Mingwei Zheng, Qingkai Shi, Xiangyu Zhang
Abstract
Static program analysis plays an essential role in program optimization, bug detection, and debugging. However, reliance on compilation and limited customization hinder its adoption in the real world. This paper presents a compositional neuro-symbolic approach named NESA that facilitates compilation-free and customizable static program analysis using large language models (LLMs) with mitigated hallucinations. Specifically, we propose an analysis policy language, a restricted form of Datalog, to support users decomposing a static program analysis problem into several sub-problems that target simpler syntactic or semantic properties upon smaller code snippets. The problem decomposition enables the LLMs to target more manageable semantic-related sub-problems with reduced hallucinations, while the syntactic ones are resolved by parsing-based analysis without hallucinations. An analysis policy then is evaluated with lazy and incremental prompting, which significantly mitigates the hallucinations and improves the performance. We evaluate NESA for program slicing and bug detection upon benchmark and real-world programs. Evaluation results show that while NESA supports compilation-free and customizable analysis, it can still achieve comparable and even better performance than existing techniques. In a customized taint vulnerability detection upon TaintBench, for example, NESA achieves a precision of 66.27%, a recall of 78.57%, and an F1 score of 0.72, surpassing an industrial approach by 0.20 in F1 score. NESA also detects 13 real-world memory leak bugs, which have been fixed by developers.
CCS Concepts: • Software and its engineering → Software notations and tools; • Theory of computation → Semantics and reasoning; • Computing methodologies → Machine learning.
Ask about this paper
Your agent reads all of it.
Lune indexed this paper to the last equation, along with the top-tier papers that cite it. Ask a question and the answer quotes them.
Your agent calls
Luneget_paper_fulltext
Free to start. No credit card required.
Terminal
Install the CLIlune papers fulltext 66dd78e7-d1e7-4117-9ee0-9efb8717b2b1Builds on23
- Chain-of-Thought Prompting Elicits Reasoning in Large Language ModelsJason Wei, Xuezhi Wang, Dale Schuurmans, Maarten Bosma et al.NeurIPS 2022 · 22,562 citations
- SWE-bench: Can Language Models Resolve Real-world Github Issues?Carlos E. Jimenez, John Yang, Alexander Wettig, Shunyu Yao et al.ICLR 2024 · 2,082 citations
- Hoppity: Learning Graph Transformations to Detect and Fix Bugs in ProgramsElizabeth Dinella, Hanjun Dai, Ziyang Li, Mayur Naik et al.ICLR 2020 · 212 citations
- Ethainter: a smart contract security analyzer for composite vulnerabilitiesLexi Brent, Neville Grech, Sifis Lagouvardos, Bernhard Scholz et al.PLDI 2020 · 163 citations
- Enhancing Static Analysis for Practical Bug Detection: An LLM-Integrated ApproachHaonan Li, Yu Hao, Yizhuo Zhai, Zhiyun QianOOPSLA 2024 · 142 citations
Related papers
- LLMDFA: Analyzing Dataflow in Code with Large Language ModelsChengpeng Wang, Wuqi Zhang, Zian Su, Xiangzhe Xu et al.NeurIPS 2024 · 51 citations
- Augmenting Multi-technique Static Analysis with Large Language Models: A Neuro-symbolic Approach to Smart Contract Vulnerability DetectionJunxiang Wang, Fu Song, Miaomiao Zhang, Bowen Du et al.ISSTA 2026
- IRIS: LLM-Assisted Static Analysis for Detecting Security VulnerabilitiesZiyang Li, Saikat Dutta, Mayur NaikICLR 2025
- Towards More Accurate Static Analysis for Taint-Style Bug Detection in Linux KernelHaonan Li, Hang Zhang, Kexin Pei, Zhiyun QianASE 2025 · 5 citations
- Can Large Language Models Reason about Program Invariants?Kexin Pei, David Bieber, Kensen Shi, Charles Sutton et al.ICML 2023 · 128 citations
