arXiv AI

Grounding SWE-Agent Decisions in Architecture-0 Design: Navigating Unknown Unknowns through Physical Mapping

arXiv AI
Aug 24

SDAD: Spec-Driven Agentic Development for the AI-Native SDLC

The paper introduces Spec-Driven Agentic Development (SDAD), a framework that leverages large language models to ingest extensive functional requirement documents and repository context in a single workflow, turning specification quality into the engine for autonomous software delivery. SDAD blends disciplined upfront formalisation with rapid implementation, encompassing intent capture, machine‑readable specifications, agentic synthesis, and multi‑agent verification with human sign‑off. It positions AI‑code as a fourth production paradigm, compares it to traditional Waterfall and Agile approaches, and extends the model to team role evolution, quantitative governance metrics, and a staged migration blueprint for practical adoption.

By Vu Hung Nguyen, Thanh Nguyen
arXiv AI
Jul 14

AgentAbstain: Do LLM Agents Know When Not to Act?

arXiv:2607. 10059v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Agent systems based on large language models (LLMs) are increasingly deployed for autonomous tasks, yet existing evaluations mostly focus on task success rather than whether agents know when to abstain.

By Xun Liu, Yi Evie Zhang, Vira Kasprova, Parisa Rabbani, Pardis Sadat Zahraei, Tianyu Zhang, Ali Ebrahimpour-Boroojeny, Varun Chandrasekaran
arXiv AI
Jun 2

Bridging Requirements and Architecture: Multi-Agent Orchestration with External Knowledge and Hierarchical Memory

arXiv:2606. 01385v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Software architecture design is a critical yet inherently complex and knowledge-intensive phase that requires balancing competing quality attributes and adapting to evolving requirements.

By Ruiyin Li, Yiran Zhang, Xiyu Zhou, Yangxiao Cai, Peng Liang, Weisong Sun, Jifeng Xuan, Zhi Jin, Yang Liu
arXiv AI
Sep 7

ARIA - An Agentic Framework for Autonomous Testing of Infotainment Systems

ARIA is a multi‑agent large‑language‑model framework that autonomously runs end‑to‑end visual tests on Android infotainment systems. From simple scenario sentences, it executes interactions, generates reproducible scripts, and produces detailed reports with visual evidence. In evaluation on a manufacturer’s device, ARIA achieved a 93.3% completion rate, correctly identified all known defects, and demonstrated lower false‑positive rates compared to a single‑agent baseline.

By Ant\'onio Azevedo, Bruno Lima, Jo\~ao Pascoal Faria
arXiv AI
Jul 7

AgentGym2: Benchmarking Large Language Model Agents in De-Idealized Real-World Environments

arXiv:2607. 05174v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Language agents, i.

By Zhiheng Xi, Dingwen Yang, Jiaqi Liu, Jixuan Huang, Honglin Guo, Baodai Huang, Tinggang Chen, Qi Zhang, Zhonghang Lu, Chenyu Liu, Jiajun Sun, Jiazheng Zhang, Dingwei Zhu, Xin Guo, Junzhe Wang, Zhihao Zhang, Yuming Yang, Junjie Ye, Minghe Gao, Dongrui Liu, Jiaming Ji, Guohao Li, Tao Gui, Qi Zhang, Xuanjing Huang
arXiv AI
Oct 9

Agent4RE: A Self-Refining Multi-agent Framework for End-to-End Software Requirements Engineering and Benchmarking

Agent4RE is a self‑refining multi‑agent framework designed for end‑to‑end software requirements engineering (RE). It coordinates specialized agents and includes two iterative improvement loops, and introduces a new real‑world dataset, RE‑E2E, for evaluating RE workflows from elicitation to generation. The framework, along with two enhanced variants that use autonomous self‑refinement or structured human feedback, consistently outperforms baseline prompting methods across eight large language models, achieving higher text‑based metrics and superior human and LLM‑as‑a‑judge ratings.

By Yongjian Tang, Linhan Li, Thomas Runkler
arXiv AI
Oct 9

A Survey on LLM-Integrated Hardware Design Verification

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.

By Hao Zheng, Jaime Rafael Imperial, Bardia Nadimi, Xiangfei Kong