arXiv:2603. 15510v2 Announce Type: replace Abstract: The synthesis of inductive loop invariants remains a critical bottleneck in automated program verification.
By Ido Pinto, Yizhak Yisrael Elboher, Haoze Wu, Nina Narodytska, Guy Katz
arXiv:2607. 05478v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Loop invariant inference is a fundamental yet challenging problem in program verification.
By Guangyuan Wu, Weining Cao, Zehui Tan, Yuan Yao, Hengfeng Wei, Taolue Chen, Xiaoxing Ma
The paper evaluates how robust large language models are at generating SystemVerilog Assertions (SVA) when the underlying RTL code undergoes semantics‑preserving transformations such as operand reordering, identifier renaming, and redundant parenthesization. Using a curated dataset and two open‑source models (Qwen2.5‑Coder‑7B and DeepSeek‑Coder‑V2‑Lite), the authors find that 9.7%–27.0% of behaviors that were correct on the original RTL become incorrect after transformation, revealing significant instability that aggregate accuracy metrics can hide.
By FNU Aditi
arXiv:2608. 14953v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Recent advances in Large Language Models (LLMs) have opened opportunities to apply high-level code transformations to the field of code optimization, and it has since emerged as one of the most fundamental tasks for LLMs to perform; however, at present, LLMs struggle to apply wide-ranging code optimization tasks due to both the complexity of the code and the inability to independently verify the correctness of the transformations.
By Zahra Fazel, Sunanda Gamage, Shayan Shirahmad Gale Bagi, Amir H. Ashouri, Tomasz S. Czajkowski, Bryan Chan, Reza Azimi, Yaoqing Gao
The paper introduces SWE-Flux, a repository‑level benchmark designed to test large language models’ ability to reason about runtime behavior. It contains 480 execution‑grounded instances from 12 real Python repositories, with gold answers automatically harvested from instrumented test executions. Evaluation of five LLMs shows the task remains difficult, with the best model achieving only 37% accuracy, and the benchmark can generate challenging variants through input perturbation.
By Hamed Taherkhani, Mohammad Abdollahi, Melika Sepidband, Hridya Dhulipala, Tien N. Nguyen, Hadi Hemmati
arXiv:2607. 09366v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Program verification is crucial for software correctness, but producing fully verified programs remains difficult in practice.
By Shirley Yu, Ruben Martins
The paper introduces Program Executability Prediction (PrEx), a task that asks large language models (LLMs) to determine whether a program is semantically valid or invalid and, if invalid, to identify the violated formal rule. To evaluate this, the authors create a dataset of systematically generated invalid programs derived from valid ones and test open‑source coding LLMs across different semantic formalisms, semantic shifts, and program splits (human‑written, LLM‑translated, fuzzer‑generated). Results show that LLMs rely more on pre‑training priors than on the provided semantics, performing poorly on modified semantics and with increasing program complexity.
By Lara Marinov, Aditya Thimmaiah, Jayanth Srinivasa, Junyi Jessy Li, Milos Gligoric
arXiv:2608. 09277v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Verified code generation asks a large language model (LLM) to generate both an executable program and a machine-checkable proof that the program meets a formal specification, promising software that is correct by construction.
By Zenan Li, Ziran Yang, Peiyang Song, Zhaoyu Li, Kaiyu Yang
arXiv:2609.39568v1 Announce Type: cross
Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) may generate unreliable code on corner cases missed by testing, while formal verification can provide machine-checkable...
By Jiaru Qian, Yihong Dong, Yongmin Li, Hao Zhu, Bin Gu, Ge Li
arXiv:2607. 04631v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: The cost of producing code is rapidly diminishing with increasingly capable AI agents, while quality assurance of generated programs has not kept pace.
By Gabriel Poesia, Simon Henniger, Tzu-Han Hsu, Yilun Du, Nada Amin
arXiv:2505. 03818v3 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Large Language Models (LLMs) can achieve strong performance on everyday coding tasks, but they can fail on complex tasks that require non-trivial reasoning about program semantics.
By Antonio Valerio Miceli-Barone, Vaishak Belle, Ali Payani
arXiv:2512. 03086v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) have shown remarkable capabilities in code translation, yet their performance deteriorates in low-resource programming domains such as Fortran and emerging frameworks like CUDA, where high-quality parallel data are scarce.
By Le Chen, Nuo Xu, Winson Chen, Bin Lei, Pei-Hung Lin, Dunzhi Zhou, Rajeev Thakur, Caiwen Ding, Ali Jannesari, Chunhua Liao