arXiv:2509.21629v3 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Program verification relies on loop invariants, yet automatically discovering strong invariants remains a long-standing challenge. We investigate whether large language models (LLMs) can accelerate program verification by generating useful loop invariants. We introduce Quokka, an evaluation-oriented framework for LLM-based invariant synthesis that provides sound evaluation and achieves state-of-the-art performance. Unlike prior work that treats LLM outputs as noisy symbolic material requiring substantial post-processing, Quokka adopts a simpler and evaluation-centric design that directly validates whether each LLM-generated invariant helps prove the target assertion. We construct a benchmark of 866 instances derived from SV-COMP and evaluate 9 state-of-the-art LLMs across multiple model families. We demonstrate that supervised fine-tuning and Best-of-N sampling yield measurable improvements, and we show that Quokka consistently outperforms prior LLM-based verifiers. Our code and data are publicly available at https://github.com/Anjiang-Wei/Quokka

arXiv:2603.04334v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: We present SpotIt+, an open-source tool for evaluating Text-to-SQL systems via bounded equivalence verification. Given a generated SQL query and the ground truth, SpotIt+ actively searches for database instances that differentiate the two queries. To ensure that the generated counterexamples reflect practically relevant discrepancies, we introduce a constraint-mining pipeline that combines rule-based specification mining over example databases with LLM-based validation. Experimental results on the BIRD dataset show that the mined constraints enable SpotIt+ to generate more realistic differentiating databases, while preserving its ability to efficiently uncover numerous discrepancies between generated and gold SQL queries that are missed by standard test-based evaluation.

arXiv:2510.26840v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Community-driven Text-to-SQL evaluation platforms play a pivotal role in tracking the state of the art of Text-to-SQL performance. The reliability of the evaluation process is critical for driving progress in the field. Current evaluation methods are largely test-based, which involves comparing the execution results of a generated SQL query and a human-labeled ground-truth on a static test database. Such an evaluation is optimistic, as two queries can coincidentally produce the same output on the test database while actually being different. In this work, we propose a new alternative evaluation pipeline, called SpotIt, where a formal bounded equivalence verification engine actively searches for a database that differentiates the generated and ground-truth SQL queries. We develop techniques to extend existing verifiers to support a richer SQL subset relevant to Text-to-SQL. A performance evaluation of ten Text-to-SQL methods on the high-profile BIRD dataset suggests that test-based methods can often overlook differences between the generated query and the ground-truth. Further analysis of the verification results reveals a more complex picture of the current Text-to-SQL evaluation.