Portrait de Foutse Khomh

Foutse Khomh

Membre académique associé
Chaire en IA Canada-CIFAR
Professeur, Polytechnique Montréal, Département de génie informatique et génie logiciel
Sujets de recherche
Apprentissage de la programmation
Apprentissage par renforcement
Apprentissage profond
Exploration des données
Modèles génératifs
Systèmes distribués
Traitement du langage naturel
Site web
Google Scholar
LinkedIn
X

Biographie

Foutse Khomh est professeur titulaire de génie logiciel à Polytechnique Montréal, titulaire d'une chaire en IA Canada-CIFAR dans le domaine des systèmes logiciels d'apprentissage automatique fiables, et titulaire d'une chaire de recherche FRQ-IVADO sur l'assurance qualité des logiciels pour les applications d'apprentissage automatique.

Il a obtenu un doctorat en génie logiciel de l'Université de Montréal en 2011, avec une bourse d'excellence. Il a également reçu le prix CS-Can/Info-Can du meilleur jeune chercheur en informatique en 2019. Ses recherches portent sur la maintenance et l'évolution des logiciels, l'ingénierie des systèmes d'apprentissage automatique, l'ingénierie en nuage et l’IA/apprentissage automatique fiable et digne de confiance.

Ses travaux ont été récompensés par quatre prix de l’article le plus important Most Influential Paper en dix ans et six prix du meilleur article ou de l’article exceptionnel (Best/Distinguished Paper). Il a également siégé au comité directeur de plusieurs conférences et rencontres : SANER (comme président), MSR, PROMISE, ICPC (comme président) et ICSME (en tant que vice-président). Il a initié et coorganisé le symposium Software Engineering for Machine Learning Applications (SEMLA) et la série d'ateliers Release Engineering (RELENG).

Il est cofondateur du projet CRSNG CREATE SE4AI : A Training Program on the Development, Deployment, and Servicing of Artificial Intelligence-based Software Systems et l'un des chercheurs principaux du projet Dependable Explainable Learning (DEEL). Il est également cofondateur de l'initiative québécoise sur l'IA digne de confiance (Confiance IA Québec). Il fait partie du comité de rédaction de plusieurs revues internationales de génie logiciel (dont IEEE Software, EMSE, JSEP) et est membre senior de l'Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE).

Étudiants actuels

Nanda Assobjio Brice Yvan
Maîtrise recherche - Polytechnique
Google Scholar
Gabriel Laberge
Doctorat - Polytechnique
Github
Google Scholar
forough majidi
Doctorat - Polytechnique
Site web
Google Scholar
Mo Malekpour
Maîtrise recherche - Polytechnique
mohammadhossein.malekpour@gmail.com
Site web
Github
Google Scholar
Mohamed Amine Merzouk
Postdoctorat - Polytechnique
Co-superviseur⋅e :
Sarath Chandar
Site web
Github
Google Scholar
Arghavan Moradi Dakhel
Postdoctorat - Polytechnique
Site web
Github
Google Scholar
Khouloud Oueslati
Maîtrise recherche - Polytechnique
Elnathan Tiokou Tiokou Fangang
Doctorat - Polytechnique
Github
Ben Braiek Yasmine
Maîtrise recherche - Polytechnique

Publications

Generative AI in Software Engineering Must Be Human-Centered: The Copenhagen Manifesto
Daniel Russo
Sebastian Baltes
Niels van Berkel
Paris Avgeriou
Fabio Calefato
Beatriz Cabrero-Daniel
Gemma Catolino
Jürgen Cito
Neil Ernst
Thomas Fritz
Hideaki Hata
Reid Holmes
Maliheh Izadi
Foutse Khomh
Mikkel Baun Kjærgaard
Grischa Liebel
Alberto Lluch Lafuente
Stefano Lambiase
Walid Maalej
Gail Murphy … (voir 15 de plus)
Nils Brede Moe
Gabrielle O'Brien
Elda Paja
Mauro Pezzè
John Stouby Persson
Rafael Prikladnicki
Paul Ralph
Martin P. Robillard
Thiago Rocha Silva
Klaas-Jan Stol
Margaret-Anne Storey
Viktoria Stray
Paolo Tell
Christoph Treude
Bogdan Vasilescu
2024-05-01
Journal of Systems and Software (publié)
doi.org
Generative AI in Software Engineering Must Be Human-Centered: The Copenhagen Manifesto
Daniel Russo
Sebastian Baltes
Niels van Berkel
Paris Avgeriou
Fabio Calefato
Beatriz Cabrero-Daniel
Gemma Catolino
Jürgen Cito
Neil Ernst
Thomas Fritz
Hideaki Hata
Reid Holmes
Maliheh Izadi
Foutse Khomh
Mikkel Baun Kjærgaard
Grischa Liebel
Alberto Lluch Lafuente
Stefano Lambiase
Walid Maalej
Gail Murphy … (voir 15 de plus)
Nils Brede Moe
Gabrielle O'Brien
Elda Paja
Mauro Pezzè
John Stouby Persson
Rafael Prikladnicki
Paul Ralph
Martin P. Robillard
Thiago Rocha Silva
Klaas-Jan Stol
Margaret-Anne Storey
Viktoria Stray
Paolo Tell
Christoph Treude
Bogdan Vasilescu
2024-05-01
Journal of Systems and Software (publié)
doi.org
Generative AI in Software Engineering Must Be Human-Centered: The Copenhagen Manifesto
Daniel Russo
Sebastian Baltes
Niels van Berkel
Paris Avgeriou
Fabio Calefato
Beatriz Cabrero-Daniel
Gemma Catolino
Jürgen Cito
Neil Ernst
Thomas Fritz
Hideaki Hata
Reid Holmes
Maliheh Izadi
Foutse Khomh
Mikkel Baun Kjærgaard
Grischa Liebel
Alberto Lluch Lafuente
Stefano Lambiase
Walid Maalej
Gail Murphy … (voir 15 de plus)
Nils Brede Moe
Gabrielle O'Brien
Elda Paja
Mauro Pezzè
John Stouby Persson
Rafael Prikladnicki
Paul Ralph
Martin P. Robillard
Thiago Rocha Silva
Klaas-Jan Stol
Margaret-Anne Storey
Viktoria Stray
Paolo Tell
Christoph Treude
Bogdan Vasilescu
2024-05-01
Journal of Systems and Software (publié)
doi.org
Introducing v0.5 of the AI Safety Benchmark from MLCommons
Bertie Vidgen
Adarsh Agrawal
Ahmed M. Ahmed
Victor Akinwande
Namir Al-nuaimi
Najla Alfaraj
Elie Alhajjar
Lora Aroyo
Trupti Bavalatti
Borhane Blili-Hamelin
K. Bollacker
Rishi Bomassani
Marisa Ferrara Boston
Sim'eon Campos
Kal Chakra
Canyu Chen
Cody Coleman
Zacharie Delpierre Coudert
Leon Strømberg Derczynski
Debojyoti Dutta … (voir 77 de plus)
Ian Eisenberg
James R. Ezick
Heather Frase
Brian Fuller
Ram Gandikota
Agasthya Gangavarapu
Ananya Gangavarapu
James Gealy
Rajat Ghosh
James Goel
Usman Gohar
Sujata Goswami
Scott A. Hale
Wiebke Hutiri
Joseph Marvin Imperial
Surgan Jandial
Nicholas C. Judd
Felix Juefei-Xu
Foutse Khomh
Bhavya Kailkhura
Hannah Rose Kirk
Kevin Klyman
Chris Knotz
Michael Kuchnik
Shachi H. Kumar
Chris Lengerich
Bo Li
Zeyi Liao
Eileen Peters Long
Victor Lu
Yifan Mai
Priyanka Mary Mammen
Kelvin Manyeki
Sean McGregor
Virendra Mehta
Shafee Mohammed
Emanuel Moss
Lama Nachman
Dinesh Jinenhally Naganna
Amin Nikanjam
Besmira Nushi
Luis Oala
Iftach Orr
Alicia Parrish
Çigdem Patlak
William Pietri
Forough Poursabzi-Sangdeh
Eleonora Presani
Fabrizio Puletti
Paul Rottger
Saurav Sahay
Tim Santos
Nino Scherrer
Alice Schoenauer Sebag
Patrick Schramowski
Abolfazl Shahbazi
Vin Sharma
Xudong Shen
Vamsi Sistla
Leonard Tang
Davide Testuggine
Vithursan Thangarasa
Elizabeth A Watkins
Rebecca Weiss
Christoper A. Welty
Tyler Wilbers
Adina Williams
Carole-Jean Wu
Poonam Yadav
Xianjun Yang
Yi Zeng
Wenhui Zhang
Fedor Zhdanov
Jiacheng Zhu
Percy Liang
Peter Mattson
Joaquin Vanschoren
This paper introduces v0.5 of the AI Safety Benchmark, which has been created by the MLCommons AI Safety Working Group. The AI Safety Benchm… (voir plus)ark has been designed to assess the safety risks of AI systems that use chat-tuned language models. We introduce a principled approach to specifying and constructing the benchmark, which for v0.5 covers only a single use case (an adult chatting to a general-purpose assistant in English), and a limited set of personas (i.e., typical users, malicious users, and vulnerable users). We created a new taxonomy of 13 hazard categories, of which 7 have tests in the v0.5 benchmark. We plan to release version 1.0 of the AI Safety Benchmark by the end of 2024. The v1.0 benchmark will provide meaningful insights into the safety of AI systems. However, the v0.5 benchmark should not be used to assess the safety of AI systems. We have sought to fully document the limitations, flaws, and challenges of v0.5. This release of v0.5 of the AI Safety Benchmark includes (1) a principled approach to specifying and constructing the benchmark, which comprises use cases, types of systems under test (SUTs), language and context, personas, tests, and test items; (2) a taxonomy of 13 hazard categories with definitions and subcategories; (3) tests for seven of the hazard categories, each comprising a unique set of test items, i.e., prompts. There are 43,090 test items in total, which we created with templates; (4) a grading system for AI systems against the benchmark; (5) an openly available platform, and downloadable tool, called ModelBench that can be used to evaluate the safety of AI systems on the benchmark; (6) an example evaluation report which benchmarks the performance of over a dozen openly available chat-tuned language models; (7) a test specification for the benchmark.
2024-04-18
ArXiv (prépublication)
doi.org
arxiv.org
Introducing v0.5 of the AI Safety Benchmark from MLCommons
Bertie Vidgen
Adarsh Agrawal
Ahmed M. Ahmed
Victor Akinwande
Namir Al-nuaimi
Najla Alfaraj
Elie Alhajjar
Lora Aroyo
Trupti Bavalatti
Borhane Blili-Hamelin
K. Bollacker
Rishi Bomassani
Marisa Ferrara Boston
Sim'eon Campos
Kal Chakra
Canyu Chen
Cody Coleman
Zacharie Delpierre Coudert
Leon Strømberg Derczynski
Debojyoti Dutta … (voir 77 de plus)
Ian Eisenberg
James R. Ezick
Heather Frase
Brian Fuller
Ram Gandikota
Agasthya Gangavarapu
Ananya Gangavarapu
James Gealy
Rajat Ghosh
James Goel
Usman Gohar
Sujata Goswami
Scott A. Hale
Wiebke Hutiri
Joseph Marvin Imperial
Surgan Jandial
Nicholas C. Judd
Felix Juefei-Xu
Foutse Khomh
Bhavya Kailkhura
Hannah Rose Kirk
Kevin Klyman
Chris Knotz
Michael Kuchnik
Shachi H. Kumar
Chris Lengerich
Bo Li
Zeyi Liao
Eileen Peters Long
Victor Lu
Yifan Mai
Priyanka Mary Mammen
Kelvin Manyeki
Sean McGregor
Virendra Mehta
Shafee Mohammed
Emanuel Moss
Lama Nachman
Dinesh Jinenhally Naganna
Amin Nikanjam
Besmira Nushi
Luis Oala
Iftach Orr
Alicia Parrish
Çigdem Patlak
William Pietri
Forough Poursabzi-Sangdeh
Eleonora Presani
Fabrizio Puletti
Paul Rottger
Saurav Sahay
Tim Santos
Nino Scherrer
Alice Schoenauer Sebag
Patrick Schramowski
Abolfazl Shahbazi
Vin Sharma
Xudong Shen
Vamsi Sistla
Leonard Tang
Davide Testuggine
Vithursan Thangarasa
Elizabeth A Watkins
Rebecca Weiss
Christoper A. Welty
Tyler Wilbers
Adina Williams
Carole-Jean Wu
Poonam Yadav
Xianjun Yang
Yi Zeng
Wenhui Zhang
Fedor Zhdanov
Jiacheng Zhu
Percy Liang
Peter Mattson
Joaquin Vanschoren
2024-04-18
ArXiv (prépublication)
doi.org
arxiv.org
Introducing v0.5 of the AI Safety Benchmark from MLCommons
Bertie Vidgen
Adarsh Agrawal
Ahmed M. Ahmed
Victor Akinwande
Namir Al-nuaimi
Najla Alfaraj
Elie Alhajjar
Lora Aroyo
Trupti Bavalatti
Borhane Blili-Hamelin
K. Bollacker
Rishi Bomassani
Marisa Ferrara Boston
Sim'eon Campos
Kal Chakra
Canyu Chen
Cody Coleman
Zacharie Delpierre Coudert
Leon Strømberg Derczynski
Debojyoti Dutta … (voir 77 de plus)
Ian Eisenberg
James R. Ezick
Heather Frase
Brian Fuller
Ram Gandikota
Agasthya Gangavarapu
Ananya Gangavarapu
James Gealy
Rajat Ghosh
James Goel
Usman Gohar
Sujata Goswami
Scott A. Hale
Wiebke Hutiri
Joseph Marvin Imperial
Surgan Jandial
Nicholas C. Judd
Felix Juefei-Xu
Foutse Khomh
Bhavya Kailkhura
Hannah Rose Kirk
Kevin Klyman
Chris Knotz
Michael Kuchnik
Shachi H. Kumar
Chris Lengerich
Bo Li
Zeyi Liao
Eileen Peters Long
Victor Lu
Yifan Mai
Priyanka Mary Mammen
Kelvin Manyeki
Sean McGregor
Virendra Mehta
Shafee Mohammed
Emanuel Moss
Lama Nachman
Dinesh Jinenhally Naganna
Amin Nikanjam
Besmira Nushi
Luis Oala
Iftach Orr
Alicia Parrish
Çigdem Patlak
William Pietri
Forough Poursabzi-Sangdeh
Eleonora Presani
Fabrizio Puletti
Paul Rottger
Saurav Sahay
Tim Santos
Nino Scherrer
Alice Schoenauer Sebag
Patrick Schramowski
Abolfazl Shahbazi
Vin Sharma
Xudong Shen
Vamsi Sistla
Leonard Tang
Davide Testuggine
Vithursan Thangarasa
Elizabeth A Watkins
Rebecca Weiss
Christoper A. Welty
Tyler Wilbers
Adina Williams
Carole-Jean Wu
Poonam Yadav
Xianjun Yang
Yi Zeng
Wenhui Zhang
Fedor Zhdanov
Jiacheng Zhu
Percy Liang
Peter Mattson
Joaquin Vanschoren
This paper introduces v0.5 of the AI Safety Benchmark, which has been created by the MLCommons AI Safety Working Group. The AI Safety Benchm… (voir plus)ark has been designed to assess the safety risks of AI systems that use chat-tuned language models. We introduce a principled approach to specifying and constructing the benchmark, which for v0.5 covers only a single use case (an adult chatting to a general-purpose assistant in English), and a limited set of personas (i.e., typical users, malicious users, and vulnerable users). We created a new taxonomy of 13 hazard categories, of which 7 have tests in the v0.5 benchmark. We plan to release version 1.0 of the AI Safety Benchmark by the end of 2024. The v1.0 benchmark will provide meaningful insights into the safety of AI systems. However, the v0.5 benchmark should not be used to assess the safety of AI systems. We have sought to fully document the limitations, flaws, and challenges of v0.5. This release of v0.5 of the AI Safety Benchmark includes (1) a principled approach to specifying and constructing the benchmark, which comprises use cases, types of systems under test (SUTs), language and context, personas, tests, and test items; (2) a taxonomy of 13 hazard categories with definitions and subcategories; (3) tests for seven of the hazard categories, each comprising a unique set of test items, i.e., prompts. There are 43,090 test items in total, which we created with templates; (4) a grading system for AI systems against the benchmark; (5) an openly available platform, and downloadable tool, called ModelBench that can be used to evaluate the safety of AI systems on the benchmark; (6) an example evaluation report which benchmarks the performance of over a dozen openly available chat-tuned language models; (7) a test specification for the benchmark.
2024-04-18
ArXiv (prépublication)
doi.org
arxiv.org
Tackling the XAI Disagreement Problem with Regional Explanations
gabriel laberge
Yann Batiste Pequignot
Mario Marchand
Foutse Khomh
2024-04-18
Proceedings of The 27th International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics (publié)
proceedings.mlr.press
PathOCl: Path-Based Prompt Augmentation for OCL Generation with GPT-4
Seif Abukhalaf
Mohammad Hamdaqa
Foutse Khomh
The rapid progress of AI-powered programming assistants, such as GitHub Copilot, has facilitated the development of software applications. T… (voir plus)hese assistants rely on large language models (LLMs), which are foundation models (FMs) that support a wide range of tasks related to understanding and generating language. LLMs have demonstrated their ability to express UML model specifications using formal languages like the Object Constraint Language (OCL). However, the context size of the prompt is limited by the number of tokens an LLM can process. This limitation becomes significant as the size of UML class models increases. In this study, we intro-duce PathOCL, a novel path-based prompt augmentation technique designed to facilitate OCL generation. PathOCL addresses the limi-tations of LLMs, specifically their token processing limit and the challenges posed by large UML class models. PathOCL is based on the concept of chunking, which selectively augments the prompts with a subset of UML classes relevant to the English specification. Our findings demonstrate that PathOCL, compared to augmenting the complete UML class model (UML-Augmentation), generates a higher number of valid and correct OCL constraints using the GPT-4 model. Moreover, the average prompt size crafted using PathOCL significantly decreases when scaling the size of the UML class models.
2024-04-14
ArXiv (prépublication)
doi.org
arxiv.org
Machine Learning Robustness: A Primer
Houssem Ben Braiek
Foutse Khomh
This chapter explores the foundational concept of robustness in Machine Learning (ML) and its integral role in establishing trustworthiness … (voir plus)in Artificial Intelligence (AI) systems. The discussion begins with a detailed definition of robustness, portraying it as the ability of ML models to maintain stable performance across varied and unexpected environmental conditions. ML robustness is dissected through several lenses: its complementarity with generalizability; its status as a requirement for trustworthy AI; its adversarial vs non-adversarial aspects; its quantitative metrics; and its indicators such as reproducibility and explainability. The chapter delves into the factors that impede robustness, such as data bias, model complexity, and the pitfalls of underspecified ML pipelines. It surveys key techniques for robustness assessment from a broad perspective, including adversarial attacks, encompassing both digital and physical realms. It covers non-adversarial data shifts and nuances of Deep Learning (DL) software testing methodologies. The discussion progresses to explore amelioration strategies for bolstering robustness, starting with data-centric approaches like debiasing and augmentation. Further examination includes a variety of model-centric methods such as transfer learning, adversarial training, and randomized smoothing. Lastly, post-training methods are discussed, including ensemble techniques, pruning, and model repairs, emerging as cost-effective strategies to make models more resilient against the unpredictable. This chapter underscores the ongoing challenges and limitations in estimating and achieving ML robustness by existing approaches. It offers insights and directions for future research on this crucial concept, as a prerequisite for trustworthy AI systems.
2024-04-01
ArXiv (prépublication)
doi.org
arxiv.org
Machine Learning Robustness: A Primer
Houssem Ben Braiek
Foutse Khomh
This chapter explores the foundational concept of robustness in Machine Learning (ML) and its integral role in establishing trustworthiness … (voir plus)in Artificial Intelligence (AI) systems. The discussion begins with a detailed definition of robustness, portraying it as the ability of ML models to maintain stable performance across varied and unexpected environmental conditions. ML robustness is dissected through several lenses: its complementarity with generalizability; its status as a requirement for trustworthy AI; its adversarial vs non-adversarial aspects; its quantitative metrics; and its indicators such as reproducibility and explainability. The chapter delves into the factors that impede robustness, such as data bias, model complexity, and the pitfalls of underspecified ML pipelines. It surveys key techniques for robustness assessment from a broad perspective, including adversarial attacks, encompassing both digital and physical realms. It covers non-adversarial data shifts and nuances of Deep Learning (DL) software testing methodologies. The discussion progresses to explore amelioration strategies for bolstering robustness, starting with data-centric approaches like debiasing and augmentation. Further examination includes a variety of model-centric methods such as transfer learning, adversarial training, and randomized smoothing. Lastly, post-training methods are discussed, including ensemble techniques, pruning, and model repairs, emerging as cost-effective strategies to make models more resilient against the unpredictable. This chapter underscores the ongoing challenges and limitations in estimating and achieving ML robustness by existing approaches. It offers insights and directions for future research on this crucial concept, as a prerequisite for trustworthy AI systems.
2024-04-01
ArXiv (prépublication)
doi.org
arxiv.org
Bugs in Large Language Models Generated Code: An Empirical Study
Florian Tambon
Arghavan Moradi Dakhel
Amin Nikanjam
Foutse Khomh
Michel C. Desmarais
Giuliano Antoniol
Large Language Models (LLMs) for code have gained significant attention recently. They can generate code in different programming languages … (voir plus)based on provided prompts, fulfilling a long-lasting dream in Software Engineering (SE), i.e., automatic code generation. Similar to human-written code, LLM-generated code is prone to bugs, and these bugs have not yet been thoroughly examined by the community. Given the increasing adoption of LLM-based code generation tools (e.g., GitHub Copilot) in SE activities, it is critical to understand the characteristics of bugs contained in code generated by LLMs. This paper examines a sample of 333 bugs collected from code generated using three leading LLMs (i.e., CodeGen, PanGu-Coder, and Codex) and identifies the following 10 distinctive bug patterns: Misinterpretations, Syntax Error, Silly Mistake, Prompt-biased code, Missing Corner Case, Wrong Input Type, Hallucinated Object, Wrong Attribute, Incomplete Generation, and Non-Prompted Consideration. The bug patterns are presented in the form of a taxonomy. The identified bug patterns are validated using an online survey with 34 LLM practitioners and researchers. The surveyed participants generally asserted the significance and prevalence of the bug patterns. Researchers and practitioners can leverage these findings to develop effective quality assurance techniques for LLM-generated code. This study sheds light on the distinctive characteristics of LLM-generated code.
2024-03-13
ArXiv (prépublication)
doi.org
arxiv.org
Assessing the Security of GitHub Copilot Generated Code - A Targeted Replication Study
Vahid Majdinasab
Michael Joshua Bishop
Shawn Rasheed
Arghavan Moradi Dakhel
Amjed Tahir
Foutse Khomh
2024-03-12
2024 IEEE International Conference on Software Analysis, Evolution and Reengineering (SANER) (publié)
doi.org
arxiv.org