Search arXivSearch

arXiv · 2607.03599

LogSemFuse: Semantic Evidence Fusion for Explainable Log Anomaly Detection

Abstract

Log anomaly detection is critical for reliability monitoring and failure diagnosis in modern software systems. Existing model-based detectors provide useful anomaly signals, but they can still miss anomalous sessions and typically expose only scores or labels rather than the operational semantics behind a decision. This lack of semantic evidence limits their ability to explain why a session is anomalous, even when the final anomaly label is correct. The gap matters in practice because operators need to distinguish urgent failures from benign deviations and trace suspicious sessions back to concrete operational behavior. LLMs can recover richer log semantics, but using them as standalone detectors or repeatedly generating free-form explanations can be costly and difficult to reuse. We present LogSemFuse, an evidence-guided plug-in framework that enhances existing backbone detectors without replacing their original pipelines. LogSemFuse combines backbone predictions with reusable semantic evidence from local event patterns, LLM-based semantic reasoning, and cluster-derived executable rules to produce both anomaly decisions and evidence-based explanations. The resulting output reports the final label together with the semantic evidence that supports it, such as fired local patterns, triggered rules, and LLM rationale. We evaluate LogSemFuse on HDFS, BGL, and Liberty using DeepLog, LogAnomaly, LogBERT, and NeuralLog as backbones. LogSemFuse improves every non-perfect baseline, preserves the already perfect case, recovers 98.8% of backbone false negatives, and produces explanations preferred over direct LLM explanations in a human study. These gains require only modest and stable inference-time overhead, showing that semantic augmentation can improve detection effectiveness and interpretability without imposing large runtime costs.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Hassan Jabri, Zeyang Ma, Zhijie Wang, Tse-Hsun Chen. 2026-07-03. LogSemFuse: Semantic Evidence Fusion for Explainable Log Anomaly Detection. https://arxiv.org/abs/2607.03599

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

Is Vibe Coding Safe? Benchmarking Vulnerability of Agent-Generated Code in Real-World Tasks

Vibe coding is a new software development paradigm in which human engineers prompt a large language model (LLM) agent to complete complex coding tasks with little supervision. Although vibe coding is increasingly adopted, is the generated code really safe to deploy in production? To investigate this question, we propose SUSVIBES, a benchmark consisting of 186 feature-request software engineering tasks from real-world open-source projects, for which, human programmers committed vulnerable implementations. We evaluate 12 widely used coding agentic settings with frontier models on the benchmark. Disturbingly, all agents perform poorly in terms of software security. Although 57% of the solutions from SWE-Agent with Claude 4 Sonnet are functionally correct, only 11.8% are secure. Further experiments demonstrate that preliminary security strategies, such as augmenting the feature request with vulnerability hints, cannot mitigate these security issues. Our findings raise serious concerns about the widespread adoption of vibe coding, particularly in security-sensitive applications. The code and dataset are available at https://github.com/LeiLiLab/susvibes. The leaderboard is at https://leililab.github.io/susvibes-leaderboard.

cs.SE

Why3-py: A Tool for Formal Verification of Hypothesis Testing and Meta-Analysis in Python

The reproducibility crisis in scientific research has received widespread recognition, thereby increasing the importance of meta-analyses that integrate statistical analyses from multiple studies. However, statistical methods often have ambiguous and implicit underlying assumptions, which can lead to their erroneous applications and interpretations. To address this issue, we propose a formal verification framework for statistical Python programs. Specifically, we present Why3-py, a Python front-end for the Why3 verification platform that transforms Python code into verification-oriented WhyML representations, addressing the challenges arising from Python's dynamic typing and runtime polymorphism. Furthermore, we extend the StatWhy tool to support the verification of meta-analysis methods. These tools enable meta-analysts to identify overlooked assumptions and misuse of analyses, and to verify the correct use of hypothesis testing and meta-analysis methods in Python code.

cs.SE

What is the Difference Between Me and You? Benchmarking the Quality Gap Between Human-Written and AI-Generated Code

AI coding assistants are becoming co-authors of production software, yet their evaluation centers on functional correctness, leaving open whether their code differs from human code in the quality dimensions dominating lifecycle cost. We compare human-written and AI-generated code at scale: 787,562 function pairs across Python, Java, and C, each human function mined from open-source repositories paired with implementations generated from its docstring by three AI assistants (OpenAI GPT models, DeepSeek-Coder, Qwen2.5-Coder). We characterize structural complexity and statistical naturalness, and map static-analysis findings onto Orthogonal Defect Classification for defects and the Common Weakness Enumeration for vulnerabilities, making authors and languages directly comparable. AI-generated code is structurally compressed and stylistically templated: roughly half the size and branching of human code, clustering apart at the style level. Defect profiles differ in kind: human code concentrates issues of mature codebases, AI code repetitive boilerplate; security is language-dependent, with LLMs producing more, and more severe, findings in Python and Java but fewer high-severity memory-safety findings than humans in C. Once size is controlled for, complexity metrics carry little signal, while naturalness separates authors. Finally, we release CQBench, a benchmark of 27,346 issue-prone tasks with baselines and an evaluation pipeline for quality assurance and security testing.

cs.SE