Author

Hanwen Wang

h-index 0 View on Semantic Scholar

We have 2 of 3 papers

We haven’t gathered this author’s papers yet. Follow them and we’ll fetch their work.

Not the right person? Other researchers publish under this name.

Preprint Aug 2026

The Order Is the Guarantee: Verifier-Budgeted Code Deletion with Static-First Learned Proposals

Frontier coding models now match or exceed strong human reference points on programming benchmarks, yet benchmark success does not imply maintainable software. Prompt-driven"vibe coding"is additive: new branches, guards, and fallbacks accumulate faster than obsolete logic is removed. We study the inverse problem-how an Al system should remove code when execution-verification capacity is finite. We formulate redundant-code reduction as proposal scheduling: a ranker orders single-statement deletion candidates, an execution suite accepts the first candidate that passes, and a budget bounds how many candidates may be tested. Our central observation is that candidate order, not model confidence, is the control surface a deployment can reason about. DELSCOUT instantiates two schedules. Given representative target-domain validation, a five-slot budget spends three slots on deterministic shortest-first candidates and two on complementary learned candidates; across nine MBPP replications with 0.5B, 0.6B, and 8B rankers this raises verified-deletion coverage by 9.5% relative (+6.7 accepted tasks) while consuming slightly fewer verifier calls than the matched static baseline. Without such validation the same rankers can lose coverage under shift, so we instead evaluate the complete static prefix first and append learned candidates only afterwards; for a deterministic verifier this makes coverage and character reduction non-decreasing by construction, at a measured 4.8-62.5% increase in verifier calls. MBPP+ then erases the in-domain advantage, showing that scheduling governs search while the test suite alone governs what"preserving behavior"means. The result is an auditable division of labor: models widen the search for removable code, order bounds the damage a mis-ranked proposal can do, and execution retains authority over every committed deletion.

Ruitong Li, Binjie Guo, Aisheng Mo et al. · 0 citations

Preprint Aug 2026

Caliber: Cross-Architecture Extraction-Cost Control for Score-Returning APIs

We present Caliber, an output-perturbation defense against model extraction that formulates noise selection as a calibration problem: how much the defense degrades the supervision signal used to train a surrogate, and the provable per-input query cost of recovering the clean logits. To defend against an attacker that uses returned scores for knowledge distillation, Caliber adds independent and identically distributed Gaussian noise to the internal logits. We establish two properties of the resulting perturbed predictions. Monotone agreement degradation: When the clean logits have a unique maximizer, agreement with the clean prediction decreases strictly with the noise scale, so every target in $(1/K,1)$ corresponds to a unique positive scale; task accuracy is bounded by computable lower and upper envelopes. Per-input recovery cost: We derive a closed-form minimax lower bound on the repeated queries needed to recover the clean logits for a fixed input. Caliber normalizes noise variance by the squared median top-two logit margin and fits the resulting noise-utility relationship with a logistic curve, either per model or shared within a task. Across more than thirty model-dataset combinations, per-model calibration achieves mean absolute relative errors of 0.6-1.4%. End-to-end experiments show that surrogate performance generally tracks the configured degradation, while fixed-input averaging follows the expected variance reduction.

Chi Wang, Hanwen Wang, Yuchen Xia et al. · 0 citations