arXiv:2606. 15834v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: The computer systems community has recently seen growing interest in AI-driven system evolution, where AI agents iteratively rewrite systems.
Machine-generated by The Flow from the publisher's headline and feed description — not written or checked by a human. The full article lives at arXiv AI.
The paper investigates the reliability of software produced by agentic AI by comparing AI-generated versions of ten well-known Linux utilities to their human-written counterparts. Using fuzz testing (both black-box and coverage-guided AFL++), the authors find that AI-generated code is often as reliable or more reliable than the latest human versions, with fewer memory errors but a higher incidence of hangs. The study emphasizes that robust AI-generated software requires careful prompting, skilled human oversight, and that the AI workflow can serve as a cost-effective specification for sustainable code.
arXiv:2603. 13428v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: With AI agents increasingly deployed as long-running systems, it becomes essential to autonomously construct and continuously evolve customized software to enable interaction within dynamic environments.
arXiv:2606. 30182v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: AI models are rapidly improving at autonomous coding, as shown by benchmark progress and one-off demonstrations such as AI implementing a C compiler.
arXiv:2608. 06640v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: The widespread integration of AI coding assistants offers undeniable boosts to engineering velocity.
arXiv:2606. 04455v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Current AI benchmarks evaluate agents on task execution within human-designed workflows.
HARDEN is a constrained evolutionary search method that transforms existing evaluation cases into more challenging variants while preserving their expected outputs. It operates along domain‑specific complexity axes and enforces feasibility constraints such as task semantics, realism, and execution validity. Experiments on FinQA, PubMedQA, and ContractNLI with Qwen3.5 models show that HARDEN can reduce task‑model accuracy by an average of 22.7% and up to 49.9% compared to single‑pass baselines.