
arXiv: 2004.00362
Abstract Vulnerability detection and safety of smart contracts are of paramount importance because of their immutable nature. Symbolic tools like OYENTE and MAIAN are typically used for vulnerability prediction in smart contracts. As these tools are computationally expensive, they are typically used to detect vulnerabilities until some predefined invocation depth. These tools require more search time as the invocation depth increases. Since the use of smart contracts increases rapidly, their analysis becomes difficult using these traditional tools. Recently, a machine learning technique called Long Short Term Memory (LSTM) has been used to predict the vulnerability of a smart contract. In the present article, we present how to classify smart contracts into Suicidal, Prodigal, Greedy, or Normal categories using Average Stochastic Gradient Descent Weight-Dropped LSTM (AWD-LSTM), a variant of LSTM. We reduced the class imbalance by considering only distinct opcode combinations for normal contracts and achieved a weighted average F1 score of 90.0%. Such techniques can be utilized in real-time to analyze a large number of smart contracts and to improve their security.
FOS: Computer and information sciences, Computer Science - Machine Learning, Computer Science - Cryptography and Security, Statistics - Machine Learning, Machine Learning (stat.ML), Cryptography and Security (cs.CR), Information Retrieval (cs.IR), Computer Science - Information Retrieval, Machine Learning (cs.LG)
FOS: Computer and information sciences, Computer Science - Machine Learning, Computer Science - Cryptography and Security, Statistics - Machine Learning, Machine Learning (stat.ML), Cryptography and Security (cs.CR), Information Retrieval (cs.IR), Computer Science - Information Retrieval, Machine Learning (cs.LG)
| selected citations These citations are derived from selected sources. This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | 41 | |
| popularity This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network. | Top 10% | |
| influence This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | Top 10% | |
| impulse This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network. | Top 10% |
