Cited by 5Software Engineering ResearchSoftware Testing and Debugging TechniquesNatural Language Processing Techniques

Learning Program Behavioral Models from Synthesized Input–Output Pairs

Mammadov, Tural, Klakow, Dietrich, Koller, Alexander, Zeller, Andreas·2026·ACM Transactions on Software Engineering and Methodology

Abstract

We introduce Modelizer —a novel framework that, given a black-box program, learns a model from its input/output behavior using neural machine translation algorithms. The resulting model mocks the original program: Given an input, the model predicts the output that would have been produced by the program. However, the model is also reversible —that is, the model can predict the input that would have produced a given output. Finally, the model is differentiable and can be efficiently restricted to predict only a certain aspect of the program behavior. Modelizer uses grammars to synthesize and inputs and unsupervised tokenizers to decompose the resulting outputs, allowing it to learn sequence-to-sequence associations between token streams. Other than input grammars, Modelizer only requires the ability to execute the program. The resulting models are small, requiring fewer than 6.3 million parameters for languages such as Markdown or HTML; and they are accurate, achieving up to 95.4% accuracy and a BLEU score of 0.98 with standard error of 0.04 in mocking real-world applications. As it learns from and predicts executions rather than code, Modelizer departs from the LLM-centric research trend, opening new opportunities for program-specific models that are fully tuned toward individual programs. Indeed, we foresee several applications of these models, especially as the output of the program can be any aspect of program behavior. Beyond mocking and predicting program behavior, the models can also synthesize inputs that are likely to produce a particular behavior, such as failures or coverage, thus assisting in program understanding and maintenance.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1145/3748720

Cites

10 of 10 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Mammadov, T., Klakow, D., Koller, A., & Zeller, A.
Affiliations
  • Helmholtz Center for Information Security (DE)
  • Saarland University (DE)
Venue
ACM Transactions on Software Engineering and Methodology
Published
2026-04-24
Volume
35
Issue
5
Pages
1-45
ISSN
  • 1049-331X (ISSN-L)
  • 1557-7392
OpenAlex
W4412477643
Cited by
5
References
10
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 1
FWCI
5.24
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
ACM Transactions on Software Engineering and Methodology (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Software Engineering Research
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Software › Software Testing and Debugging Techniques
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Natural Language Processing Techniques
Keywords
program behavior modeling, input-output pairs, differentiable models, sequence-to-sequence learning

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review