The paper examines how large‑language‑model (LLM) decompilers, which produce clean, idiomatic C code, are currently evaluated mainly on recompilability and passing shipped tests. It shows that these metrics can mask significant behavioral differences: a decompiled function may recompile and pass all tests yet diverge on other inputs or lose disclosed vulnerabilities. To address this, the authors propose Decompile‑Diverge, a behavioral oracle that synthesizes drivers, fuzzes inputs, and compares the decompiled code’s behavior to the original, revealing divergences in up to 13% of cases and exposing gaps in current evaluation suites.
By Chang Liu, Edward Raff, Kristopher Micinski
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
arXiv:2608. 12440v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: This paper reports a single, fully instrumented case study of a large-scale architectural refactoring by an AI coding agent under a specification-first protocol, with no human review of the generated code and no pre-existing oracle to validate the target behaviour.
By Joel Abenhaim
arXiv:2607. 08981v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: LLM-generated code often compiles, passes tests, and appears correct, yet breaks once deployed.
By Viraaji Mothukuri, Reza M. Parizi
arXiv:2608. 13867v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: AI coding agents are commonly evaluated as models but deployed as systems.
By Stephanie Jarmak
E2E-SWE is a benchmark that tests large language models’ ability to create complete, functional software repositories from scratch. It includes 186 tasks across 11 programming languages, each requiring an agent to build an installable project based solely on a natural‑language specification and an empty workspace, while passing a hidden test suite. The benchmark was crafted by software engineers and LLMs, then refined through iterative verification by autonomous agents to ensure clarity and solvability.
By Hantian Ding, Chloe Bi, Jiacheng Zhu, John Yang, Matt Deitke, Pengcheng Yin, Zijian Wang, Rui Hou
arXiv:2604. 01527v4 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Production deployment of AI coding agents requires fast, reproducible evaluation signals.
By Smriti Jha, Matteo Paltenghi, Chandra Maddila, Vijayaraghavan Murali, Shubham Ugare, Satish Chandra
arXiv:2608. 14863v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: LLM-based coding agents have advanced rapidly on single-process SWE tasks, with frontier models now clustering in the high-70s on SWE-bench Verified.
By Yibo Yan, Huijuan Wang, Junzhou He, Yizhuo Liang, Shaoyu Wang, Huanchen Sun, Seo Jin Park
arXiv:2607. 14896v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Addressing a structural-engineering request requires more than a single answer; it requires a chain of interdependent artifacts: interpreted requirements, a computable model, validation records, solver outputs, code-check records, and a final report.
By Sizhong Qin, Yi Gu, Yao Jiang, Ao Cai, Changjian Zhou, Shaoxuan Shuai, Jiachang Wang, Tianhao Shen, Yueqiang Li, Xinhao Li, Li Zeng, Yueshi Chen, Dachen Gao, Genrong Xu, Wenjie Liao, Xinzheng Lu
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.
arXiv:2609.38269v1 Announce Type: cross
Abstract: Coding agents are increasingly asked to build software rather than patch it, yet benchmarks for from-scratch repository construction are mostly limit...
By Pei Yang, Tianyu Shi, Yuhang Yao, Wanyi Chen, Tongyun Yang, Dun Pei, Haonan Wang, Pengbin Feng, Guanxu Yu, Jingchun Huang, Zeyu Zhang, Shuhan Sun, Hao Li, Xiang Li, Jie Xiao, Xinyu Wang, Hanxin Chen, Daqi Li, Qi Jia, Hongshan Lin, Zhizhou Gu, Zijun Tian, Weizhi Du, Lynn Ai, Eric Yang
arXiv:2604. 00392v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Agents that synthesize their own tools ship a second artifact alongside each answer: a software library that future tasks reuse, compose, and depend on.
By Alibek Kaliyev, Artem Maryanskyy