Co-audit: tools to help humans double-check AI-generated content

Users are increasingly being warned to check AI-generated content for correctness. Still, as LLMs (and other generative models) generate more complex output, such as summaries, tables, or code, it becomes harder for the user to audit or evaluate the output for quality or correctness. Hence, we are seeing the emergence of tool-assisted experiences to help the user double-check a piece of AI-generated content. We refer to these as co-audit tools. Co-audit tools complement prompt engineering techniques: one helps the user construct the input prompt, while the other helps them check the output response. As a specific example, this paper describes recent research on co-audit tools for spreadsheet computations powered by generative models. We explain why co-audit experiences are essential for any application of generative AI where quality is important and errors are consequential (as is common in spreadsheet computations). We propose a preliminary list of principles for co-audit, and outline research challenges.

TrojanPuzzle: Covertly Poisoning Code-Suggestion Models

With tools like GitHub Copilot, automatic code suggestion is no longer a dream in software engineering. These tools, based on large language models, are typically trained on massive corpora of code mined from unvetted public sources. As a result, these models are susceptible to data poisoning attacks where an adversary manipulates the model's training or fine-tuning phases by injecting malicious data. Poisoning attacks could be designed to influence the model's suggestions at run time for chosen contexts, such as inducing the model into suggesting insecure code payloads. To achieve this, prior poisoning attacks explicitly inject the insecure code payload into the training data, making the poisoning data detectable by static analysis tools that can remove such malicious data from the training set. In this work, we demonstrate two novel data poisoning attacks, COVERT and TROJANPUZZLE, that can bypass static analysis by planting malicious poisoning data in out-of-context regions such as docstrings. Our most novel attack, TROJANPUZZLE, goes one step further in generating less suspicious poisoning data by never including certain (suspicious) parts of the payload in the poisoned data, while still inducing a model that suggests the entire payload when completing code (i.e., outside docstrings). This makes TROJANPUZZLE robust against signature-based dataset-cleansing methods that identify and filter out suspicious sequences from the training data. Our evaluation against two model sizes demonstrates that both COVERT and TROJANPUZZLE have significant implications for how practitioners should select code used to train or tune code-suggestion models.

What is it like to program with artificial intelligence?

Large language models, such as OpenAI's codex and Deepmind's AlphaCode, can generate code to solve a variety of problems expressed in natural language. This technology has already been commercialised in at least one widely-used programming editor extension: GitHub Copilot. In this paper, we explore how programming with large language models (LLM-assisted programming) is similar to, and differs from, prior conceptualisations of programmer assistance. We draw upon publicly available experience reports of LLM-assisted programming, as well as prior usability and design studies. We find that while LLM-assisted programming shares some properties of compilation, pair programming, and programming via search and reuse, there are fundamental differences both in the technical possibilities as well as the practical experience. Thus, LLM-assisted programming ought to be viewed as a new way of programming with its own distinct properties and challenges. Finally, we draw upon observations from a user study in which non-expert end user programmers use LLM-assisted tools for solving data tasks in spreadsheets. We discuss the issues that might arise, and open research challenges, in applying large language models to end-user programming, particularly with users who have little or no programming expertise.