Fix title
Browse files
README.md
CHANGED
|
@@ -3,24 +3,23 @@ license: eupl-1.1
|
|
| 3 |
language: code
|
| 4 |
---
|
| 5 |
|
| 6 |
-
|
| 7 |
-
|
| 8 |
|
| 9 |
[GitHub repository](https://github.com/NetherlandsForensicInstitute/asmtransformers)
|
| 10 |
|
| 11 |
## General
|
| 12 |
### What is the purpose of the model
|
| 13 |
The model is a BERT model for ARM64 assembly code. This specific model has NOT been specifically finetuned for semantic similarity, you most likely want
|
| 14 |
-
to use our [other
|
| 15 |
-
model](https://huggingface.co/NetherlandsForensicInstitute/ARM64bert-embedding). The main purpose of the ARM64BERT is to be a baseline
|
| 16 |
to compare the finetuned model against.
|
| 17 |
|
| 18 |
-
### What does the model architecture look like?
|
| 19 |
The model architecture is inspired by [jTrans](https://github.com/vul337/jTrans) (Wang et al., 2022). It is a BERT model
|
| 20 |
(Devlin et al. 2019),
|
| 21 |
although the typical Next Sentence Prediction has been replaced with Jump Target Prediction, as proposed in Wang et al.
|
| 22 |
|
| 23 |
-
### What is the output of the model?
|
| 24 |
The model is a BERT base model, of which the outputs are not meant to be used directly.
|
| 25 |
|
| 26 |
### How does the model perform?
|
|
@@ -67,8 +66,7 @@ either the train or the test set, not both. We have not performed any deduplicat
|
|
| 67 |
The dataset was collected by our team. The annotation of similar/non-similar function comes from the different compilation
|
| 68 |
levels, i.e. what we consider "similar functions" is in fact the same function that has been compiled in a different way.
|
| 69 |
|
| 70 |
-
|
| 71 |
-
### Any remarks on data quality and bias?
|
| 72 |
The way we classify functions as similar may have implications. For example, sometimes, two different ways of compiling
|
| 73 |
the same function does not result in a different piece of code. We did not remove duplicates from the data during training,
|
| 74 |
but we did implement checks in the evaluation stage and it seems that the model has not suffered from the simple training
|
|
|
|
| 3 |
language: code
|
| 4 |
---
|
| 5 |
|
| 6 |
+
ARM64BERT 🦾
|
| 7 |
+
------------
|
| 8 |
|
| 9 |
[GitHub repository](https://github.com/NetherlandsForensicInstitute/asmtransformers)
|
| 10 |
|
| 11 |
## General
|
| 12 |
### What is the purpose of the model
|
| 13 |
The model is a BERT model for ARM64 assembly code. This specific model has NOT been specifically finetuned for semantic similarity, you most likely want
|
| 14 |
+
to use our [other model](https://huggingface.co/NetherlandsForensicInstitute/ARM64bert-embedding). The main purpose of the ARM64BERT is to be a baseline
|
|
|
|
| 15 |
to compare the finetuned model against.
|
| 16 |
|
| 17 |
+
### What does the model architecture look like?
|
| 18 |
The model architecture is inspired by [jTrans](https://github.com/vul337/jTrans) (Wang et al., 2022). It is a BERT model
|
| 19 |
(Devlin et al. 2019),
|
| 20 |
although the typical Next Sentence Prediction has been replaced with Jump Target Prediction, as proposed in Wang et al.
|
| 21 |
|
| 22 |
+
### What is the output of the model?
|
| 23 |
The model is a BERT base model, of which the outputs are not meant to be used directly.
|
| 24 |
|
| 25 |
### How does the model perform?
|
|
|
|
| 66 |
The dataset was collected by our team. The annotation of similar/non-similar function comes from the different compilation
|
| 67 |
levels, i.e. what we consider "similar functions" is in fact the same function that has been compiled in a different way.
|
| 68 |
|
| 69 |
+
### Any remarks on data quality and bias?
|
|
|
|
| 70 |
The way we classify functions as similar may have implications. For example, sometimes, two different ways of compiling
|
| 71 |
the same function does not result in a different piece of code. We did not remove duplicates from the data during training,
|
| 72 |
but we did implement checks in the evaluation stage and it seems that the model has not suffered from the simple training
|