Moving Faster and Reducing Risk: Using LLMs in Release Deployment

Release engineering has traditionally focused on continuously delivering features and bug fixes to users, but at a certain scale, it becomes impossible for a release engineering team to determine what should be released. At Meta's scale, the responsibility appropriately and necessarily falls back on the engineer writing and reviewing the code. To address this challenge, we developed models of diff risk scores (DRS) to determine how likely a diff is to cause a SEV, i.e., a severe fault that impacts end-users. Assuming that SEVs are only caused by diffs, a naive model could randomly gate X% of diffs from landing, which would automatically catch X% of SEVs on average. However, we aimed to build a model that can capture Y% of SEVs by gating X% of diffs, where <tex xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">$Y &gt; &gt; X$</tex>. By training the model on historical data on diffs that have caused SEVs in the past, we can predict the riskiness of an outgoing diff to cause a SEV. Diffs that are beyond a particular threshold of risk can then be gated. We have four types of gating: no gating (green), weekend gating (weekend), medium impact on end-users (yellow), and high impact on end-users (red). The input parameter for our models is the level of gating, and the outcome measure is the number of captured SEVs, i.e., the number of gated diffs that would have led to a SEV. Our research approaches include a logistic regression model, a BERT-based model, and generative LLMs. Our baseline regression model captures 18.7%, 27.9%, and 84.6% of SEVs while respectively gating the top 5% (weekend), 10% (yellow), and 50% (red) of risky diffs. The BERT-based model, StarBERT, only captures <tex xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">$0.61\times, 0.85\times$</tex>, and <tex xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">$0.81\times$</tex> as many SEVs as the logistic regression for the weekend, yellow, and red gating zones, respectively. The generative LLMs, iCodeLlama-34B and iDiffLlama-13B, when risk-aligned, capture more SEVs than the logistic regression model in production: <tex xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">$1.40\times, 1.52\times, 1.05\times$</tex>, respectively.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Published
2025-04-27
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1109/icse-seip66354.2025.00045
Primary Topic
Service-Oriented Architecture and Web Services
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Moving Faster and Reducing Risk: Using LLMs in Release Deployment

Peter C. Rigby, Rui Abreu, Vijayaraghavan Murali, Audris Mockus et al.
Service-Oriented Architecture and Web Services
article

Moving Faster and Reducing Risk: Using LLMs in Release Deployment

Peter C. Rigby, Rui Abreu, Vijayaraghavan Murali, Audris Mockus, Chandra Maddila, Jun Ge, Nachiappan Nagappan, Kaavya Chinniah, Megh Mehta, Weiyan Sun
article en

Abstract

Release engineering has traditionally focused on continuously delivering features and bug fixes to users, but at a certain scale, it becomes impossible for a release engineering team to determine what should be released. At Meta's scale, the responsibility appropriately and necessarily falls back on the engineer writing and reviewing the code. To address this challenge, we developed models of diff risk scores (DRS) to determine how likely a diff is to cause a SEV, i.e., a severe fault that impacts end-users. Assuming that SEVs are only caused by diffs, a naive model could randomly gate X% of diffs from landing, which would automatically catch X% of SEVs on average. However, we aimed to build a model that can capture Y% of SEVs by gating X% of diffs, where <tex xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">$Y &gt; &gt; X$</tex>. By training the model on historical data on diffs that have caused SEVs in the past, we can predict the riskiness of an outgoing diff to cause a SEV. Diffs that are beyond a particular threshold of risk can then be gated. We have four types of gating: no gating (green), weekend gating (weekend), medium impact on end-users (yellow), and high impact on end-users (red). The input parameter for our models is the level of gating, and the outcome measure is the number of captured SEVs, i.e., the number of gated diffs that would have led to a SEV. Our research approaches include a logistic regression model, a BERT-based model, and generative LLMs. Our baseline regression model captures 18.7%, 27.9%, and 84.6% of SEVs while respectively gating the top 5% (weekend), 10% (yellow), and 50% (red) of risky diffs. The BERT-based model, StarBERT, only captures <tex xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">$0.61\times, 0.85\times$</tex>, and <tex xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">$0.81\times$</tex> as many SEVs as the logistic regression for the weekend, yellow, and red gating zones, respectively. The generative LLMs, iCodeLlama-34B and iDiffLlama-13B, when risk-aligned, capture more SEVs than the logistic regression model in production: <tex xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">$1.40\times, 1.52\times, 1.05\times$</tex>, respectively.

Meta (United States) (US)
Climate action
Openalex Percentile: Top 68%
Service-Oriented Architecture and Web Services
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.