Skip to content
OpenTrain AIFor AI Companies

SecJev: Bringing Security Expertise to System One Decision Models

Zheng Chen, Fei Yu, Haohao Huang, Yang Li, Anlong Chen +1 morePublished Oct 2, 2026
arXiv PDF
Researcher verdict
Context only
Use as context only
Benchmark evidence
Thin evidence
Verify before relying
Time to first repro
A few days
Plan setup time
Risk flags
2
Review before use

Abstract

Domain fit: Niche / domain-specific · No strong AI-core implementation/artifact signals were detected from current providers.

Security workflows need models that turn complex observations and explicit policies into decisions. System One models introduced by Jev return typed predictions and probabilities; security specialization supplies the domain expertise behind those predictions. We introduce SecJev, to our knowledge the first family of Jev-like decision models specialized for security, spanning 0.8B to 9B parameters. Built on Kev's single-pass candidate scorer, SecJev learns Boolean, choice, and ordered decisions from text, telemetry, and observation histories. We develop SecJev-Corpus to unify source-label prediction and explicit-policy evaluation across 14 tasks and eight sources. It covers tool outputs, traffic, federated updates, consensus, authentication, and vehicle messages. Scene-weighted training adapts the models across these domains while preserving a shared typed decision interface. Security specialization improves every model in the family; SecJev-0.8B outperforms general Kev-9B by 20.51 percentage points in task-macro accuracy. Comparisons with answer-only generative fine-tuning show close accuracy and latency with lower peak inference memory. Tests on new source groups reproduce gains over Kev in prompt-injection and traffic decisions, with capture-dependent false alarms. We release adapters, decision heads, SecJev-Corpus, and training and inference code.

Results and benchmarks

Freshness tier: warm
Security workflows need models that turn complex observations and explicit policies into decisions.
Task Dataset Metric Value Source
LoRA BIPIA Accuracy 72.00 paper-derived
LoRA BIPIA decisions Accuracy 56.17 paper-derived

Audit each benchmark finding before selecting an implementation path. Evidence refs map to the disclosure below.

Implementation

No direct implementation yet

Maintained implementation evidence is not confirmed for this paper yet.

Use the implementation status and reproduction sections for the current action plan.

Implementation evidence summary
Confidence: low

Recommendation evidence is currently too limited for a maintained-repo choice. Use Implementation Status and Reproduction Path for a practical baseline plan.

Reproduction risks
  • Estimate is based on paper-only reproduction flow

Reproduction readiness

Time to first repro: days
Last checked: Oct 5, 2026

No repo

No verified implementation available

  • No maintained repository has been identified for this paper. Check adjacent implementations or HF artifacts below.

Hardware requirements

  • Expect multi-day setup/compute for meaningful reproduction based on current guidance.

Hugging Face artifacts

No trustworthy direct or curated related Hugging Face artifacts were found yet. Use targeted searches to quickly locate candidate models, datasets, and demos.

Tip: start with models, then check datasets and spaces if you need evaluation data or demos.

Research context

Tasks

LoRA

Methods

LoRA / Parameter-efficient tuning

Domains

None detected

Evaluation and human feedback data

Open this paper in HFEPX to review benchmark signals, evaluation modes, and human-feedback protocol context.

Open in HFEPX
Explore similar papers

Jump to Paper2Code search queries derived from this paper's research context.