arXiv (All)
open access
Correct Verdicts, Flawed Reasoning: Structured Auditing of LLM-based Vulnerability Reasoning
Large Language Models (LLMs) are increasingly deployed for automated software vulnerability analysis. Binary classification alone is insufficient; practitioners need explanations to triage bugs and engineer patches. Standard practice relies on Chain-of-Thought (CoT) prompting, but free-form reasonin
Conceptio Open Archive
Analyze & explore related research in Conceptio
Connect this record directly into your research workflow or AI agent. Explore citations across open repositories, query full text, and export structured proof bundles.
This document is indexed with metadata only: full text is not available in the archive for this record. Open the official source ↗
Related documents
- Correct Verdicts, Flawed Reasoning: Structured Auditing of LLM-based Vulnerability Reasoning#1194317
- Towards Behavior Tree-Guided Vulnerability Detection with Lightweight LLMs#822187
- Can Failed Trajectories Reveal Where Agents Go Wrong? Agentic Failure Attribution Without Step-Level Labels#1297457
- Beyond Predefined Sinks: Security-Aware Dependency Analysis for LLM Agents#1187692
- Beyond Predefined Sinks: Security-Aware Dependency Analysis for LLM Agents#1181566
Record · ID 1215469
Retrieved via Conceptio: every document is proof-bundled with source, license, and retrieval metadata.
Retrieved via Conceptio: every document is proof-bundled with source, license, and retrieval metadata.
Bring this data into your agent: Connect via MCP or API · 20 free credits to start · no card required
Read the Docs → · View CLI source on GitHub · Conceptio Open Knowledge Archive
Read the Docs → · View CLI source on GitHub · Conceptio Open Knowledge Archive