Files
Open_Ultra_SAST/benchmarks
Marius CiepluchandClaude Opus 5 4e7fe65f17 measure(model-grounded-detection): the pipeline beats the hunter on both axes
hunter (K=5)   pipeline (K=1)
  pair-correct              76.7%          80.0%
  leak                      12.3%           6.7%
  cost                     ~$0.69        $0.0076
  determinism               none      entailed band deterministic

Higher recall, half the leak, a fifth of the model calls, ~90x cheaper.

Three runs, and the middle one earned its keep by changing nothing. Run 2 fixed
family routing and returned numbers IDENTICAL to run 1 -- which was the clue
that the dominance arbiter was being reached and its verdict thrown away. Every
corroboration was put to the judge as a taint question ("a sanitizer appears on
the path -- does it suffice?"), meaningless for a missing guard, so the judge
said no and the finding was dropped. Run 3 phrases the residual question for
the arbiter that raised it and converts 2 of 3 access_control pairs from silent
to pair-correct, arriving at model_corroborated -- a rung that existed but had
never reached a finding.

This settles a question open since the start of the session, and reverses an
earlier answer of mine. "Detection has regressed" was measured with the
proposer disconnected: an arbiter compared against a detector, before four
wiring bugs were found.

Division of labour: 15 suspicion, 9 model_entailed, 2 model_corroborated. The
model arbitrates 11 of 26 findings, and every conversion from suspicion to a
model rung removes a leak and a model call at once -- the payoff curve for sink
coverage and interprocedural resolution, now measured rather than assumed.

Still silent: 3 config_secrets (the settings table is Flask/FastAPI-shaped
while the pairs are aiohttp) and 1 access_control still to diagnose.

Three full runs cost about $0.03 in total.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <[email protected]>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01T7XD7x5KonMdmGRkp63EQG
2026-09-08 18:40:51 +02:00
..