arXiv AI

Translating Natural Language to Strategic Temporal Specifications via LLMs

arXiv:2606. 30441v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: A rigorous formalization of system requirements is a fundamental prerequisite for the verification of Multi-Agent Systems (MAS).

arXiv Machine Learning
Jun 5

Can LLMs Write Correct TLA+ Specifications? Evaluating Natural-Language-to-TLA+ Generation

arXiv:2606. 05792v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: TLA+ has supported industrial verification at companies such as Amazon and Microsoft, yet writing correct TLA+ specifications from natural language still requires time and expertise, which limits adoption.

By Arslan Bisharat, Brian Ortiz, Eric Spencer, Khushboo Bhadauria, TaiNing Wang, George K. Thiruvathukal, Konstantin Laufer, Mohammed Abuhamad
arXiv Computation and Language
Aug 28

Agent Seer: Synthesizing Scenarios from Specification Understanding

Agent Seer is a pipeline that automatically synthesizes realistic evaluation scenarios for AI agents that use external tools, using only the tool’s specification (function names, natural‑language descriptions, and typed parameter schemas). Starting from a single Model Context Protocol (MCP) specification, it enriches raw schemas, generates graded scenarios with synthetic tool outputs, and expands them into mock‑data‑grounded multi‑turn dialogues that demonstrate strong tool‑calling correctness and conversational coherence. Across seven diverse MCP specifications, the pipeline achieves high quality, with parameter‑schema complexity emerging as the main driver of quality variation and argument‑value accuracy identified as the dominant failure mode.

By Harish Karumuri, Mahesh Vemula, David Lopes Pegna
arXiv AI
Aug 28

From Atomic to Agentic: Towards Interpretable Evaluation of LLMs' Agentic Mathematical Capabilities

The paper introduces a new benchmark that evaluates large language models (LLMs) on their agentic mathematical reasoning rather than just final answers. It aligns problem‑solving behaviors with a taxonomy of reusable mathematical atomic capabilities and includes planning, action, and feedback tasks in both textual and multimodal settings. Experiments show that models with similar end‑to‑end accuracy can have very different agentic profiles, highlighting the importance of process‑level evaluation.

By Jiayi Kuang, Yinghui Li, Yunze Song, Keyu Chen, Zhifeng Shen, Yangning Li, Yidong Wang, Di Yin, Ruizhi Qiao, Xing Sun, Kai Jin, Ying Shen, Liang Lin, Philip S. Yu
arXiv Machine Learning
Jun 16

Pushing the Boundaries of Natural Reasoning: Interleaved Bonus from Formal-Logic Verification

arXiv:2601. 22642v2 Announce Type: replace Abstract: Large Language Models (LLMs) show remarkable capabilities, yet their stochastic next-token prediction creates logical inconsistencies and reward hacking that formal symbolic systems avoid.

By Chuxue Cao, Jinluan Yang, Haoran Li, Kunhao Pan, Zijian Zhao, Zhengyu Chen, Yuchen Tian, Lijun Wu, Conghui He, Sirui Han, Yike Guo
arXiv AI
Sep 17

Which LLM is Best for Translating Natural Language Goals to PDDL

The paper evaluates how well current Large Language Models can translate natural language goals, written by video game testers, into well‑formed PDDL targets for classical planning. Using a carefully designed prompt template, six state‑of‑the‑art LLMs were tested on correctness, speed, and error tendencies with real‑world benchmarks. All models achieved high correctness (>92%), with Gemini 2.5 Flash reaching 96% accuracy and the fewest false positives, while GPT‑4.1 was the fastest, yet differences in performance and occasional failures due to ambiguity and domain limits remain.

By Tomas Balyo, Lukas Chrpa, G. Michael Youngblood
arXiv AI
Jun 19

Navigating Unreliable Parametric and Contextual Knowledge: Explicit Knowledge Conflict Resolution for LLM Inference

arXiv:2606. 20245v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) have achieved strong performance across a wide range of language-based tasks by leveraging both extensive parametric knowledge and in-context learning ability, enabling them to incorporate external information provided in the input prompt.

By Huang Peng, Jiuyang Tang, Weixin Zeng, Hao Xu, Xiang Zhao