BZPEERReading, trust and collaboration for research
Menu

Discover

GraphFollow connections around a paper, topic or saved view.

Workspaces

HomePick up where your research flow left off.InboxHandle requests, replies and notifications from one place.CollectionsCurate reading lists, evidence sets and shareable dossiers.ResearchSee your private provenance graph, trail and imports.CollaborationMove from discovery into focused discussion rooms.PublishDraft, preview and publish full-text research articles.

Network

ExpertsFind specialists worth following or asking for help.CommunitiesJoin research circles organized around shared work.PartnersSee external organizations active around the same topics.

Opportunities

ListingsBrowse roles, calls and collaborations with clearer fit signals.

Account

Log inReturn to your reading and collaboration workspace.Create accountStart saving work, following people and joining teams.
Log inCreate account

Researcher profile

Vu Le

Vu Le contributes to research discovery and scholarly infrastructure.

ResearcherAffiliation not importedOpen to collaborate
Software EngineeringLogic in Computer ScienceMachine LearningProgramming Languages

Trust snapshot

Quick read

Trust 15 - UnverifiedVerification L1Unclaimed author
3works
0followers
4topics
4close collaborators

Actions

Decide how to stay connected

Follow researcher0

Identity and collaboration

How to connect with this researcher

Claiming links this public author record to a researcher profile and unlocks direct collaboration workflows.

Log in to claim

Direct collaboration

Open a focused conversation when the fit is right

Claim this author entity first to unlock direct invitations.

Research graph

See the researcher in context

Open full explorer

Inspect adjacent work, topics, institutions and collaborators without jumping out to a separate graph page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Published work

3 published item(s)

preprint2026arXiv

Applying Formal Methods Tools to an Electronic Warfare Codebase (Experience report)

While using formal methods offers advantages over unit testing, their steep learning curve can be daunting to developers and can be a major impediment to widespread adoption. To support integration into an industrial software engineering workflow, a tool must provide useful information and must be usable with relatively minimal user effort. In this paper, we discuss our experiences associated with identifying and applying formal methods tools on an electronic warfare (EW) system with stringent safety requirements and present perspectives on formal methods tools from EW software engineers who are proficient in development yet lack formal methods training. In addition to a difference in mindset between formal methods and unit testing approaches, some formal methods tools use terminology or annotations that differ from their target programming language, creating another barrier to adoption. Input/output contracts, objects in memory affected by a function, and loop invariants can be difficult to grasp and use. In addition to usability, our findings include a comparison of vulnerabilities detected by different tools. Finally, we present suggestions for improving formal methods usability including better documentation of capabilities, decreased manual effort, and improved handling of library code.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2022arXiv

Synchromesh: Reliable code generation from pre-trained language models

Large pre-trained language models have been used to generate code,providing a flexible interface for synthesizing programs from natural language specifications. However, they often violate syntactic and semantic rules of their output language, limiting their practical usability. In this paper, we propose Synchromesh: a framework for substantially improving the reliability of pre-trained models for code generation. Synchromesh comprises two components. First, it retrieves few-shot examples from a training bank using Target Similarity Tuning (TST), a novel method for semantic example selection. TST learns to recognize utterances that describe similar target programs despite differences in surface natural language features. Then, Synchromesh feeds the examples to a pre-trained language model and samples programs using Constrained Semantic Decoding (CSD): a general framework for constraining the output to a set of valid programs in the target language. CSD leverages constraints on partial outputs to sample complete correct programs, and needs neither re-training nor fine-tuning of the language model. We evaluate our methods by synthesizing code from natural language descriptions using GPT-3 and Codex in three real-world languages: SQL queries, Vega-Lite visualizations and SMCalFlow programs. These domains showcase rich constraints that CSD is able to enforce, including syntax, scope, typing rules, and contextual logic. We observe substantial complementary gains from CSD and TST in prediction accuracy and in effectively preventing run-time errors.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2021arXiv

Can Program Synthesis be Used to Learn Merge Conflict Resolutions? An Empirical Analysis

Forking structure is widespread in the open-source repositories and that causes a significant number of merge conflicts. In this paper, we study the problem of textual merge conflicts from the perspective of Microsoft Edge, a large, highly collaborative fork off the main Chromium branch with significant merge conflicts. Broadly, this study is divided into two sections. First, we empirically evaluate textual merge conflicts in Microsoft Edge and classify them based on the type of files, location of conflicts in a file, and the size of conflicts. We found that ~28% of the merge conflicts are 1-2 line changes, and many resolutions have frequent patterns. Second, driven by these findings, we explore Program Synthesis (for the first time) to learn patterns and resolve structural merge conflicts. We propose a novel domain-specific language (DSL) that captures many of the repetitive merge conflict resolution patterns and learn resolution strategies as programs in this DSL from example resolutions. We found that the learned strategies can resolve 11.4% of the conflicts (~41% of 1-2 line changes) that arise in the C++ files with 93.2% accuracy.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access