arXiv:2512. 02567v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: The advent of strong generative AI has a considerable impact on various software engineering tasks such as code repair, test generation, or language translation.
arXiv:2608. 13681v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Translating C code into safe, idiomatic Rust is a longstanding software-engineering goal because it can eliminate entire classes of memory-safety vulnerabilities while preserving the functional behavior of legacy systems.
arXiv:2607. 13921v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Languages with rich static semantics, such as Rust, provide stronger guarantees for AI-generated code, but their strictness makes generation more difficult.
arXiv:2606. 17514v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Large Language Models have shown remarkable capabilities in code generation.
arXiv:2607. 03174v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Software diversity has been extensively studied as a means of reducing the risk of common-mode failures.
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.
arXiv:2607. 19843v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) have made automated program repair (APR) increasingly practical for real-world bugs, but repairing directly from bug reports remains underconstrained.
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.
arXiv:2608. 04439v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) have made notable progress in code generation, but they still struggle on challenging tasks that require sophisticated algorithms or complex implementations.
arXiv:2606. 31159v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Large Language Models (LLMs) are rapidly transforming software development, yet their use in security-critical contexts raises a key question: do models know when their generated code is insecure?
arXiv:2603. 18334v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: As Large Language Models (LLMs) increasingly assist secure software development, their ability to meet the rigorous demands of Rust program verification remains unclear.
arXiv:2505. 07372v3 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: This paper presents a novel methodology for enhancing Automated Program Repair (APR) through synthetic data generation utilizing Large Language Models (LLMs).
arXiv:2501. 11086v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Large Language Models (LLMs) have shown tremendous promise in automated software engineering.