Learning Program Behavioral Models from Synthesized Input–Output Pairs
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
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
Exploring the Limits of Transfer Learning with a Unified Text-to-Text Transformer
Raffel, C., Shazeer, N., Roberts, A., Lee, K., Narang, S., Matena, M., Zhou, Y., Li, W., & Liu, P. J. (2019) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.1910.10683 · Cited by 10,929 · see citing works
Larian Studios Dev Team (2024) · doi:10.1145/3292500.3330701 · Cited by 8,618 · cited 1× · see citing works
“Generally, Modelizer is not limited by grammar-based generators and can utilize any kind of input generator to create the corpus of training data.”
LoRA: Low-Rank Adaptation of Large Language Models
Hu, E. J., Shen, Y., Wallis, P., Allen-Zhu, Z., Li, Y., Wang, S., Wang, L., & Chen, W. (2021) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2106.09685 · Cited by 2,523 · see citing works
Wang, Y., Wang, W., Joty, S., & Hoi, S. C. H. (2021) · Proceedings of the 2021 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing · doi:10.18653/v1/2021.emnlp-main.685 · Cited by 1,495 · see citing works
Wang, Y., Wang, W., Joty, S., & Hoi, S. C. H. (2021) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2109.00859 · Cited by 1,495 · see citing works
Asleep at the Keyboard? Assessing the Security of GitHub Copilot’s Code Contributions
Pearce, H., Ahmad, B., Tan, B., Dolan-Gavitt, B., & Karri, R. (2022) · 2022 IEEE Symposium on Security and Privacy (SP) · doi:10.1109/sp46214.2022.9833571 · Cited by 476 · see citing works
From WER and RIL to MER and WIL: improved evaluation measures for connected speech recognition
Morris, A. C., Maier, V., & Green, P. (2004) · Interspeech 2004 · doi:10.21437/interspeech.2004-668 · Cited by 290 · see citing works
Productivity Assessment of Neural Code Completion
Ziegler, A., Kalliamvakou, E., Li, X. A., Rice, A., Rifkin, D., Simister, S., Sittampalam, G., & Aftandilian, E. (2022) · Proceedings of the 6th ACM SIGPLAN International Symposium on Machine Programming · doi:10.1145/3520312.3534864 · Cited by 200 · see citing works
Productivity Assessment of Neural Code Completion
Ziegler, A., Kalliamvakou, E., Simister, S., Sittampalam, G., Li, A., Rice, A., Rifkin, D., & Aftandilian, E. (2022) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2205.06537 · Cited by 200 · see citing works
You see what I want you to see: poisoning vulnerabilities in neural code search
Wan, Y., Zhang, S., Zhang, H., Sui, Y., Xu, G., Yao, D., Jin, H., & Sun, L. (2022) · Proceedings of the 30th ACM Joint European Software Engineering Conference and Symposium on the Foundations of Software Engineering · doi:10.1145/3540250.3549153 · Cited by 60 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Does Few-Shot Learning Help LLM Performance in Code Synthesis?
Xu, D., Xie, T., Xia, B., Li, H., Bai, Y., Sun, Y., & Wang, W. (2024) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2412.02906 · Cited by 3 · see citing works
“These efforts, along with frameworks like Modelizer (Mammadov et al., 2024) and AcTracer (Huang et al., 2024), underscore the importance of selecting informative input-output pairs for strong reasoning and generalization.”
- 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