SERIAL-7 is a Korean‑English benchmark that evaluates large language models on their ability to generate machine‑verifiable structured outputs across seven representations. It introduces an executable verification framework that separates semantic derivation (Derive), constrained artifact generation (Realize), and cross‑representation preservation (Preserve), using 177 validated artifacts and 43 atomic representation constraints. The benchmark shows that reliable structured generation requires explicit, executable verification of how artifacts are realized and preserved, as evidenced by varying compliance rates across ten models.
arXiv:2607. 09366v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Program verification is crucial for software correctness, but producing fully verified programs remains difficult in practice.
arXiv:2607. 04562v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) generate fluent outputs that can be wrong.
arXiv:2609.23742v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Small open-source large language models (LLMs) in the 0.6B-4B parameter range are increasingly deployed for structured output generation (JSON, functio...
The paper introduces a framework that translates natural‑language descriptions into SysMLv2 models using a generate‑check‑repair loop driven by a SysMLv2 conformance checker. By embedding the checker as an oracle, the system iteratively repairs generated models until they achieve zero conformance errors, ensuring they are deployable in industrial modeling environments. Evaluation on 151 prompts across four large language models shows the approach raises production‑conformance acceptance from 51.16% to 100%.
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.
The paper surveys how large language models (LLMs) are being used in hardware verification, covering tasks such as assertion generation, testbench creation, bug localization, and formal reasoning. It categorizes the literature by methodology, verification goal, tool interaction, benchmarks, and evaluation metrics, and distinguishes between inference-time techniques (prompting, retrieval, structured reasoning, agentic workflows) and training-time adaptation. The authors highlight that LLMs excel as semantic reasoning, search, and orchestration components within verification workflows, yet emphasize the need for semantic alignment, scalable integration, generalization, and rigorous evaluation to ensure true verification correctness.
The paper introduces MeMoDecode, a decoding framework that enforces both concrete and abstract syntax as well as well‑formedness constraints for domain‑specific languages (DSLs) during large language model generation. By mapping generated text to partial metamodel instances and retrying from the last consistent snapshot, MeMoDecode guarantees consistency without sacrificing alignment metrics. Experiments on four DSLs and six open‑weight LLMs show a 23% average improvement over unconstrained decoding and an 8% improvement over grammar‑constrained decoding, with modest runtime overhead.
arXiv:2609.21190v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Ensuring the correctness of LLM-generated code is a core challenge for modern software engineering. Benchmarks for agentic code generation check corr...
arXiv:2601.19747v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: In the rapidly evolving field of Electronic Design Automation (EDA), the deployment of Large Language Models (LLMs) for Register-Transfer Lev...
arXiv:2608. 03983v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Optimizing compilers miss profitable transformations when their enabling semantics are absent from the analyzed program representation.
The paper investigates whether constrained decoding harms or helps large language model (LLM) performance. It introduces a taxonomy of three constraint types—format, validity, and reasoning—and shows that suitable constraints can preserve or even improve performance by eliminating invalid paths. Experiments across multiple model families reveal that perceived performance drops are mainly due to non-equivalent prompting and output formats, while validity constraints boost reliability and reasoning constraints can enhance accuracy when they guide beneficial reasoning trajectories.
arXiv:2509. 21629v4 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Program verification relies on loop invariants, yet automatically discovering strong invariants remains a long-standing challenge.