arXiv:2608. 14590v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: LLM agents increasingly perform irreversible real-world actions, including database updates, API calls, file operations, and autonomous use of tools.
By Pierre Dantas, Lucas Cordeiro, Ehsan Nowroozi, Tihanyi Norbert
arXiv:2607. 01793v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: LLM agents increasingly perform autonomous actions through external tools, leading to complex and evolving safety risks.
By Yunhao Feng, Ruixiao Lin, Ming Wen, Qinqin He, Yanming Guo, Yifan Ding, Yutao Wu, Jialuo Chen, Yunhao Chen, Xiaohu Du, Jianan Ma, Zixing Chen, Zhuoer Xu, Xingjun Ma, Xinhao Deng
The paper presents a method for turning expert diagnoses of verification failures into reusable guidance for coding agents. By combining executable language definitions in the K framework with a set of procedures for constructing specifications, repairing proofs, and auditing their adequacy, the authors achieve a 164/164 success rate on the HumanEval benchmark after two targeted repairs. They further demonstrate that audits can detect defects missed by successful proofs and evaluate the approach on KleverBench and Optimism proofs, highlighting both progress and remaining challenges.
By Yuqing Zhai, Xiaohong Chen, Lingming Zhang, Sriram Vishwanath, Grigore Rosu
arXiv:2606. 32007v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: We study agentic code generation in Dafny, where a model must generate both executable code and the proof artifacts for verification.
By Benjamin Breen, Austin Letson, Borja Requena Pozo, Leopoldo Sarra
arXiv:2606. 02282v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Orchestrating Large Language Models into Multi-Agent Systems (LLM-MAS) has unlocked remarkable reasoning capabilities, yet emergent failures and hallucinations that resist characterisation block their deployment in safety-critical domains -- a gap made legally untenable by emerging AI regulation.
By I\~naki Dellibarda Varela, R. Sendra-Arranz, Pablo Romero-Sorozabal, J. M. Valverde-Garc\'ia, Annemarie F. Laudanski, \'Alvaro Guti\'errez, Eduardo Rocon, Manuel Cebrian
arXiv:2606. 18619v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: The advent of agentic vulnerability detection is already becoming a watershed moment for software security.
By Zhengxiong Luo, Mehtab Zafar, Dylan Wolff, Abhik Roychoudhury
arXiv:2607. 29254v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: AI agents extend large language models (LLMs) with external tools, enabling them to perform complex tasks and translate model outputs into consequential real-world actions.
By Minghui Pan, Jiayuxuan Yang, Yuanyuan Yuan, Yu Jiang, Zhenpeng Chen
arXiv:2606. 02302v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Autonomous LLM agents increasingly operate in stateful environments where they access tools, files, memory, and external services.
By Hao Cheng, Changtao Miao, Tianle Song, Yin Wu, He Liu, Erjia Xiao, Junchi Chen, Xiaoyu Shi, Yichi Wang, Jing Yang, Taowen Wang, Jinhao Duan, Mengshu Sun, Peiyan Dong, Xuan Shen, Yang Cao, Renjing Xu, Kaidi Xu, Jindong Gu, Bo Zhang, Jize Zhang, Chenhao Lin, Philip Torr, Chao Shen
The paper investigates the reliability of software produced by agentic AI by comparing AI-generated versions of ten well-known Linux utilities to their human-written counterparts. Using fuzz testing (both black-box and coverage-guided AFL++), the authors find that AI-generated code is often as reliable or more reliable than the latest human versions, with fewer memory errors but a higher incidence of hangs. The study emphasizes that robust AI-generated software requires careful prompting, skilled human oversight, and that the AI workflow can serve as a cost-effective specification for sustainable code.
By Ayesha Shafique, Barton P. MIller, Elisa R. Heymann
arXiv:2606. 19380v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Software engineering and deployment are increasingly being delegated to AI coding agents.
By Kenneth Ge, Andre Assis
The paper introduces rebuild‑dossier, an open‑source tool that locks an application’s real interface before code is written and enforces one‑test‑at‑a‑time building through automated checks. In experiments, a compliant agent failed a held‑back test while a rule‑breaking agent passed, showing that a passing test suite can be gamed. The study also demonstrates that the automated check mechanism, rather than interface‑locking alone, is crucial for reliable rebuilds, and that multi‑level verification catches errors that single‑level checks miss.
By Parker Fawcett
AI agents are increasingly used for programming, but do not provide any guarantee on the correctness of generated code. Verified code generation, in which an agent produces both an implementation and a machine-checked proof of its specification, offers a stronger path toward trustworthy AI-generated software.