arXiv:2607. 17686v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Modern software teams have mature tools for low-level testing, such as pytest, JUnit, and Jest, which make it inexpensive to write unit tests and run them on every commit.
By Mansur Arief, Nur Ahmad Khatim, Ali Akarma, Ahmad Alfan Alfian Irfan
Formal verification offers the strongest guarantee of software correctness, but it does not scale: the proofs demanded by interactive theorem provers such as Coq require enormous expert effort. Large language models (LLMs) promise to generate these proofs automatically, yet existing approaches wire a fixed, human-designed proof strategy into the system and constrain the model to follow it (retrieving premises and predicting tactics one step at a time, or splitting goals by divide-and-conquer), and still prove only a fraction of their target theorems.
arXiv:2607. 06341v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Formal verification offers the strongest guarantee of software correctness, but it does not scale: the proofs demanded by interactive theorem provers such as Coq require enormous expert effort.
By Shuangxiang Kan, Shuanglong Kan, Sebastian Ertel
arXiv:2605. 15229v3 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Existing code benchmarks measure whether an agent can produce any test that reproduces a known bug, or whether it can produce a patch that fixes a described issue.
By Lucas Jing, Xinqi Wang, Liao Zhang, Simon S. Du
arXiv:2602. 09464v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Vericoding refers to the generation of formally verified code from rigorous specifications.
By Haoyu Zhao, Ziran Yang, Jiawei Li, Deyuan He, Zenan Li, Chi Jin, Venugopal V. Veeravalli, Aarti Gupta, Sanjeev Arora
arXiv:2607. 17352v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Designing effective Lean proof agents is a central challenge in formal mathematical reasoning.
By Yuqing Li, Zeguan Wu, Yu Gan, Junyu Liu
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.
By Zichen Xie, Wenxi Wang
arXiv:2605. 10907v3 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: The dominant paradigm for AI agents is an "on-the-fly" loop in which agents synthesize plans and execute actions within seconds or minutes in response to user prompts.
By Roxana Geambasu, Mariana Raykova, Pierre Tholoniat, Trishita Tiwari, Lillian Tsai, Wen Zhang
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:2606. 31002v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Theorem-proving benchmarks evaluate proof search against fixed formal statements, but natural-language-to-Lean formalization must generate the formal statement itself.
By Ke Zhang, Patricio Gallardo Candela, Sudhir Murthy, Yi Xie, Zhi Wang, Maziar Raissi
arXiv:2608. 16742v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Large Language Models (LLMs) have achieved remarkable progress in code generation, yet ensuring correctness in complex, repository-level tasks remains challenging.
By Hongyue Yu, Kefan Li, Jiakun Li, Hongzheng Chai, Yuan Yuan, Rui He, Junyi Wei
Concurrent stateful library APIs expose behavior through evolving resource ownership, lifecycle states, and competing interleavings. Large language models can synthesize executable Rust tests, but their outputs often violate API preconditions, remain shallow, or reduce concurrency to accidental sequential traces.