Back to #software testing

Cross-Stack Validation of Language-Model Training: A Clinical Fine-Tuning Case Study

Thang Tran L. Dang
Aug 2026 · 0 citations · 23 references
Computer Science

TL;DR

Whether independently implemented training stacks can serve as differential oracles for a whole fine-tuning pipeline, rather than the operators and inference paths that prior differential testing targets, is studied.

Abstract

Neural network training has an oracle problem: a run can converge normally and yield a usable model while the software beneath it computes something other than specified. Almost all such work runs on one stack, so there is rarely anything independent to check against. We study whether independently implemented training stacks can serve as differential oracles for a whole fine-tuning pipeline, rather than the operators and inference paths that prior differential testing targets. We define a trajectory-level protocol -- a shared specification, cross-check points spanning arithmetic, model loading, data rendering and the learning trajectory, and a separation of independence of the stack, the orchestration and the language runtime -- and apply it to a LoRA adaptation of Qwen3-0.6B over 168,574 clinical question-answer pairs under PyTorch and under numbat, an independent framework written in Zig, driven natively and through its C interface from six languages. Across 42 paired evaluations spanning a full epoch the two stacks'held-out cross-entropy differs by 0.134% on average, and four implementations end the epoch within 0.15% of one another. The comparison exposed 17 faults that single-implementation development had missed, two of them notable for software engineering. The fault with the largest effect on the trained model lay outside the numerical kernels: a mismatch in how clinical text was rendered moved held-out loss 0.15, some 500 times more than the arithmetic faults found beside it. And four faults were reachable only from a language whose memory model differs from the first two implementations: a scheduler migrating work across threads, a collector blind to device memory, an ownership discipline needing a primitive the interface lacked. Implementation diversity has several axes, and the runtime is one.

View source

Similar papers

#software testing Preprint Aug 2026

Evaluating Inference-Time Defenses Against Package Hallucination in LLM-Generated Code

LLMs are increasingly used for code generation, yet they frequently hallucinate non-existent software packages, creating exploitable entry points into the software supply chain. We make four contributions to this problem. First, we show that prior evaluation methodologies systematically inflate hallucination rates by misclassifying standard-library modules as hallucinations in some languages. For Python, the overestimation reaches 9.4 percentage points. Second, we evaluate seven inference-time defenses for mitigating package hallucinations, including five guided decoding strategies (Greedy, Contrastive, DoLa, Nudging, and Active Layer-Contrastive Decoding), an iterative self-refinement approach (Self-Refine), and a Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG)-based defense.. Across eight models spanning five families and four programming languages (Python, JavaScript, Ruby, Rust), RAG reduces the package hallucination rate (PHR) in 18 of 32 model--language configurations. Third, we introduce Package Utility (PU) to assess whether defenses preserve valid and task-relevant recommendations. Among strategies evaluated, Greedy decoding provides the strongest average mitigation--utility trade-off. Fourth, we stress-test all strategies under adversarial prompts seeded with fabricated package names and find that PHR surges by up to 45 percentage points relative to standard prompts, with Ruby consistently the most vulnerable language (80.9--95.2\%). Under adversarial conditions, RAG and Self-Refine outperform all decoding-only strategies, indicating that robust defense requires either external grounding or iterative self-verification when prompts are actively hostile. Our results recast package hallucination as both a measurement problem and a decoding-time control problem, and they demonstrate that the choice of defense must be matched to the threat model and recommendation utility.

Albérick Euraste Djiré, Iyiola E. Olatunji, Melissa Tessa et al. · 1 citation
#software testing Review Aug 2026

ChatGPT Solves All Tested Qiskit Homework Assignments

This study examined whether introductory Qiskit homework could remain autogradable while requiring students to run, review, and discuss results rather than banning AI.

A. Kaltchenko, Gurnivaj Tiwana · 0 citations

Mixed Reality Glasses Image Translocation for Binocular Diplopia.

This prototype MRG image translocation software was helpful to 69% of patients with binocular diplopia, but limited by large angle strabismus because of the limited instrument field of view.

Edsel B Ing, Kevin Sha, Sarosh Dandoti et al. · 0 citations
#software testing Open access Aug 2026

Multi-Disease Prediction Using Machine Learning: A Web-Based Diagnostic Support System for Diabetes, Heart Disease, and Parkinson\'s Disease

A diagnostic support system based on a unified web platform that classifies patients according to the risks of developing three diseases based on regularly collected clinical or audio data using classical supervised learning algorithms is presented.

Vedamurthy D R, Dr. Anup Ritti, A. Bibi et al. · 0 citations
#software testing Open access Aug 2026

GENERALIZABILITY OF CLOUD-BASED AI SOFTWARE FOR ANTERIOR TOOTH SEGMENTATION IN MULTICENTER CBCT DATASETS: AN EXTERNAL VALIDATION STUDY.

The reduced segmentation time and consistent performance across CBCT systems support the potential integration of cloud-based AI segmentation into digital dental workflows, especially for anterior teeth, where accurate morphology is clinically relevant.

Gabriel Cunha Adiverci, Erielma Lomba Dias Julião, A. Leite et al. · 0 citations

Related blog posts

MIT News · Artificial Intelligence Aug 17, 2026

Q&A: Rethinking how innovation happens

In his latest book, Professor Eugene Fitzgerald examines the forces that turn breakthroughs into value — and why innovation resists simple formulas.