arXiv:2603.03456v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Agentic coding agents are increasingly deployed autonomously, at scale, and over long-context horizons. Throughout an agent's lifetime, it must navigate tensions between explicit instructions, learned values, and environmental pressures, often in contexts unseen during training. Prior work on model preferences, agent behavior under value tensions, and goal drift has relied on static, synthetic settings that do not capture the complexity of real-world environments. To this end, we introduce a framework built on OpenCode to orchestrate realistic, multi-step coding tasks to measure how agents violate explicit constraints in their system prompt over time with and without environmental pressure toward competing values. Using this framework, we demonstrate that GPT-5 mini, Haiku 4.5, and Grok Code Fast 1 exhibit asymmetric drift: they are more likely to violate their system prompt when its constraint opposes strongly-held values like security and privacy. We find for the models and values tested that goal drift correlates with three compounding factors: value alignment, adversarial pressure, and accumulated context. However, even strongly-held values like privacy show non-zero violation rates under sustained environmental pressure. These findings reveal that shallow compliance checks are insufficient and that comment-based pressure can exploit model value hierarchies to override system prompt instructions. More broadly, our findings highlight a gap in current alignment approaches in ensuring that agentic systems appropriately balance explicit user constraints against broadly beneficial learned preferences under sustained environmental pressure.

arXiv:2603.04390v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: WebGIS development requires rigor, yet agentic AI frequently fails due to five large language model (LLM) limitations: context constraints, cross-session forgetting, stochasticity, instruction failure, and adaptation rigidity. We propose a dual-helix governance framework reframing these challenges as structural governance problems that model capacity alone cannot resolve. We implement the framework as a 3-track architecture (Knowledge, Behavior, Skills) that uses a knowledge graph substrate to stabilize execution by externalizing domain facts and enforcing executable protocols, complemented by a self-learning cycle for autonomous knowledge growth. Applying this to the FutureShorelines WebGIS tool, a governed agent refactored a 2,265-line monolithic codebase into modular ES6 components. Results demonstrated a 51\% reduction in cyclomatic complexity and a 7-point increase in maintainability index. A comparative experiment against a zero-shot LLM confirms that externalized governance, not just model capability, drives operational reliability in geospatial engineering. This approach is implemented in the open-source AgentLoom governance toolkit.

arXiv:2603.03823v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Large language model (LLM)-powered agents have demonstrated strong capabilities in automating software engineering tasks such as static bug fixing, as evidenced by benchmarks like SWE-bench. However, in the real world, the development of mature software is typically predicated on complex requirement changes and long-term feature iterations -- a process that static, one-shot repair paradigms fail to capture. To bridge this gap, we propose \textbf{SWE-CI}, the first repository-level benchmark built upon the Continuous Integration loop, aiming to shift the evaluation paradigm for code generation from static, short-term \textit{functional correctness} toward dynamic, long-term \textit{maintainability}. The benchmark comprises 100 tasks, each corresponding on average to an evolution history spanning 233 days and 71 consecutive commits in a real-world code repository. SWE-CI requires agents to systematically resolve these tasks through dozens of rounds of analysis and coding iterations. SWE-CI provides valuable insights into how well agents can sustain code quality throughout long-term evolution.

arXiv:2603.04177v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Large language model (LLM) coding agents can generate working code, but their solutions often accumulate complexity, duplication, and architectural debt. Human developers address such issues through refactoring: behavior-preserving program transformations that improve structure and maintainability. In this paper, we investigate if LLM agents (i) can execute refactorings reliably and (ii) identify the refactorings that human developers actually chose in real codebases. We present CodeTaste, a benchmark of refactoring tasks mined from large-scale multi-file changes in open-source repositories. To score solutions, we combine repository test suites with custom static checks that verify removal of undesired patterns and introduction of desired patterns using dataflow reasoning. Our experimental results indicate a clear gap across frontier models: agents perform well when refactorings are specified in detail, but often fail to discover the human refactoring choices when only presented with a focus area for improvement. A propose-then-implement decomposition improves alignment, and selecting the best-aligned proposal before implementation can yield further gains. CodeTaste provides an evaluation target and a potential preference signal for aligning coding agents with human refactoring decisions in realistic codebases.

arXiv:2603.04244v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: User feedback is essential for the success of mobile apps, yet what users report and what developers need often diverge. Research shows that users often submit vague feedback and omit essential contextual details. This leads to incomplete reports and time-consuming clarification discussions. To overcome this challenge, we propose FeedAIde, a context-aware, interactive feedback approach that supports users during the reporting process by leveraging the reasoning capabilities of Multimodal Large Language Models. FeedAIde captures contextual information, such as the screenshot where the issue emerges, and uses it for adaptive follow-up questions to collaboratively refine with the user a rich feedback report that contains information relevant to developers. We implemented an iOS framework of FeedAIde and evaluated it on a gym's app with its users. Compared to the app's simple feedback form, participants rated FeedAIde as easier and more helpful for reporting feedback. An assessment by two industry experts of the resulting 54 reports showed that FeedAIde improved the quality of both bug reports and feature requests, particularly in terms of completeness. The findings of our study demonstrate the potential of context-aware, GenAI-powered feedback reporting to enhance the experience for users and increase the information value for developers.

arXiv:2603.04245v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: User feedback is crucial for the evolution of mobile apps. However, research suggests that users tend to submit uninformative, vague, or destructive feedback. Unlike recent AI4SE approaches that focus on generating code and other development artifacts, our work aims at empowering users to submit better and more constructive UI feedback with concrete suggestions on how to improve the app. We propose LikeThis!, a GenAI-based approach that takes a user comment with the corresponding screenshot to immediately generate multiple improvement alternatives, from which the user can easily choose their preferred option. To evaluate LikeThis!, we first conducted a model benchmarking study based on a public dataset of carefully critiqued UI designs. The results show that GPT-Image-1 significantly outperformed three other state-of-the-art image generation models in improving the designs to address UI issues while keeping the fidelity and without introducing new issues. An intermediate step in LikeThis! is to generate a solution specification before sketching the design as a key to achieving effective improvement. Second, we conducted a user study with 10 production apps, where 15 users used LikeThis! to submit their feedback on encountered issues. Later, the developers of the apps assessed the understandability and actionability of the feedback with and without generated improvements. The results show that our approach helps generate better feedback from both user and developer perspectives, paving the way for AI-assisted user-developer collaboration.

arXiv:2509.13471v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) show promise for translating natural-language statutes into executable logic, but reliability in legally critical settings remains challenging due to ambiguity and hallucinations. We present an agentic approach for developing legal-critical software, using U.S. federal tax preparation as a case study. The key challenge is test-case generation under the oracle problem, where correct outputs require interpreting law. Building on metamorphic testing, we introduce higher-order metamorphic relations that compare system outputs across structured shifts among similar individuals. Because authoring such relations is tedious and error-prone, we use an LLM-driven, role-based framework to automate test generation and code synthesis. We implement a multi-agent system that translates tax code into executable software and incorporates a metamorphic-testing agent that searches for counterexamples. In experiments, our framework using a smaller model (GPT-4o-mini) achieves a worst-case pass rate of 45%, outperforming frontier models (GPT-4o and Claude 3.5, 9-15%) on complex tax-code tasks. These results support agentic LLM methodologies as a path to robust, trustworthy legal-critical software from natural-language specifications.

arXiv:2512.18925v3 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: While Large Language Models (LLMs) have demonstrated remarkable capabilities, research shows that their effectiveness depends not only on explicit prompts but also on the broader context provided. This requirement is especially pronounced in software engineering, where the goals, architecture, and collaborative conventions of an existing project play critical roles in response quality. To support this, many AI coding assistants have introduced ways for developers to author persistent, machine-readable directives that encode a project's unique constraints. Although this practice is growing, the content of these directives remains unstudied. This paper presents a large-scale empirical study to characterize this emerging form of developer-provided context. Through a qualitative analysis of 401 open-source repositories containing cursor rules, we developed a comprehensive taxonomy of project context that developers consider essential, organized into five high-level themes: Conventions, Guidelines, Project Information, LLM Directives, and Examples. Our study also explores how this context varies across different project types and programming languages, offering implications for the next generation of context-aware AI developer tools.

arXiv:2603.00183v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Context: Test case prioritization (TCP) is a technique widely used by software development organizations to accelerate regression testing. Objectives: We aim to systematize existing TCP knowledge and to propose and empirically evaluate a new TCP approach. Methods: We conduct a snowballing review (SR) on TCP, implement a~comprehensive platform for TCP research (TCPFramework), analyze existing evaluation metrics and propose two new ones (\rAPFDc{} and ATR), and develop a~family of ensemble TCP methods called approach combinators. Results: The SR helped identify 324 studies related to TCP. The techniques proposed in our study were evaluated on the RTPTorrent dataset, consistently outperforming their base approaches across the majority of subject programs, and achieving performance comparable to the current state of the art for heuristical algorithms (in terms of \rAPFDc{}, NTR, and ATR), while using a distinct approach. Conclusions: The proposed methods can be used efficiently for TCP, reducing the time spent on regression testing by up to 2.7\%. Approach combinators offer significant potential for improvements in future TCP research, due to their composability.

arXiv:2603.00251v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Modern engineering design platforms excel at discipline-specific tasks such as CAD, CAM, and CAE, but often lack native systems engineering frameworks. This creates a disconnect where system-level requirements and architectures are managed separately from detailed component design, hindering holistic development and increasing integration risks. To address this, we present the conceptual framework for the GenAI Workbench, a Model-Based Systems Engineering (MBSE) environment that integrates systems engineering principles into the designer's workflow. Built on an open-source PLM platform, it establishes a unified digital thread by linking semantic data from documents, physical B-rep geometry, and relational system graphs. The workbench facilitates an AI-assisted workflow where a designer can ingest source documents, from which the system automatically extracts requirements and uses vision-language models to generate an initial system architecture, such as a Design Structure Matrix (DSM). This paper presents the conceptual architecture, proposed methodology, and anticipated impact of this work-in-progress framework, which aims to foster a more integrated, data-driven, and informed engineering design methodology.

arXiv:2603.01896v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Can LLM agents explore codebases and reason about code semantics without executing the code? We study this capability, which we call agentic code reasoning, and introduce semi-formal reasoning: a structured prompting methodology that requires agents to construct explicit premises, trace execution paths, and derive formal conclusions. Unlike unstructured chain-of-thought, semi-formal reasoning acts as a certificate: the agent cannot skip cases or make unsupported claims. We evaluate across three tasks (patch equivalence verification, fault localization, and code question answering) and show that semi-formal reasoning consistently improves accuracy on all of them. For patch equivalence, accuracy improves from 78% to 88% on curated examples and reaches 93% on real-world agent-generated patches, approaching the reliability needed for execution-free RL reward signals. For code question answering on RubberDuckBench Mohammad et al. (2026), semi-formal reasoning achieves 87% accuracy. For fault localization on Defects4J Just et al. (2014), semi-formal reasoning improves Top-5 accuracy by 5 percentage points over standard reasoning. These results demonstrate that structured agentic reasoning enables meaningful semantic code analysis without execution, opening practical applications in RL training pipelines, code review, and static program analysis.

arXiv:2603.02512v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Human-Certified Module Repositories (HCMRs) are introduced in this work as a new architectural model for constructing trustworthy software in the era of AI-assisted development. As large language models increasingly participate in code generation, configuration synthesis, and multi-component integration, the reliability of AI-assembled systems will depend critically on the trustworthiness of the building blocks they use. Today's software supply-chain incidents and modular development ecosystems highlight the risks of relying on components with unclear provenance, insufficient review, or unpredictable composition behavior. We argue that future AI-driven development workflows require repositories of reusable modules that are curated, security-reviewed, provenance-rich, and equipped with explicit interface contracts. To this end, we propose HCMRs, a framework that blends human oversight with automated analysis to certify modules and support safe, predictable assembly by both humans and AI agents. We present a reference architecture for HCMRs, outline a certification and provenance workflow, analyze threat surfaces relevant to modular ecosystems, and extract lessons from recent failures. We further discuss implications for governance, scalability, and AI accountability, positioning HCMRs as a foundational substrate for reliable and auditable AI-constructed software systems.

arXiv:2603.02235v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Neural network verification tools currently support only a narrow class of specifications, typically expressed as low-level constraints over raw inputs and outputs. This limitation significantly hinders their adoption and practical applicability across diverse application domains where correctness requirements are naturally expressed at a higher semantic level. This challenge is rooted in the inherent nature of deep neural networks, which learn internal representations that lack an explicit mapping to human-understandable features. To address this, we bridge this gap by introducing a novel component to the verification pipeline, making existing verification tools applicable to a broader range of domains and specification styles. Our framework enables users to formulate specifications in natural language, which are then automatically analyzed and translated into formal verification queries compatible with state-of-the-art neural network verifiers. We evaluate our approach on both structured and unstructured datasets, demonstrating that it successfully verifies complex semantic specifications that were previously inaccessible. Our results show that this translation process maintains high fidelity to user intent while incurring low computational overhead, thereby substantially extending the applicability of formal DNN verification to real-world, high-level requirements.

arXiv:2603.02345v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Infrastructure as code (IaC) tools automate cloud provisioning but verifying that deployed systems remain consistent with the IaC specifications remains challenging. Such configuration drift occurs because of bugs in the IaC specification, manual changes, or system updates. Large language model (LLM)-based agentic AI systems can automate the analysis of large volumes of telemetry data, making them suitable for the detection of configuration drift. However, existing agentic systems implicitly assume that the tools they invoke always return correct outputs, making them vulnerable to erroneous tool responses. Since agents cannot distinguish whether an anomalous tool output reflects a real infrastructure problem or a broken tool, such errors may cause missed drift or false alarms, reducing reliability precisely when it is most needed. We introduce RIVA (Robust Infrastructure by Verification Agents), a novel multi-agent system that performs robust IaC verification even when tools produce incorrect or misleading outputs. RIVA employs two specialized agents, a verifier agent and a tool generation agent, that collaborate through iterative cross-validation, multi-perspective verification, and tool call history tracking. Evaluation on the AIOpsLab benchmark demonstrates that RIVA, in the presence of erroneous tool responses, recovers task accuracy from 27.3% when using a baseline ReAct agent to 50.0% on average. RIVA also improves task accuracy 28% to 43.8% without erroneous tool responses. Our results show that cross-validation of diverse tool calls enables more reliable autonomous infrastructure verification in production cloud environments.

arXiv:2603.02512v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Human-Certified Module Repositories (HCMRs) are introduced in this work as a new architectural model for constructing trustworthy software in the era of AI-assisted development. As large language models increasingly participate in code generation, configuration synthesis, and multi-component integration, the reliability of AI-assembled systems will depend critically on the trustworthiness of the building blocks they use. Today's software supply-chain incidents and modular development ecosystems highlight the risks of relying on components with unclear provenance, insufficient review, or unpredictable composition behavior. We argue that future AI-driven development workflows require repositories of reusable modules that are curated, security-reviewed, provenance-rich, and equipped with explicit interface contracts. To this end, we propose HCMRs, a framework that blends human oversight with automated analysis to certify modules and support safe, predictable assembly by both humans and AI agents. We present a reference architecture for HCMRs, outline a certification and provenance workflow, analyze threat surfaces relevant to modular ecosystems, and extract lessons from recent failures. We further discuss implications for governance, scalability, and AI accountability, positioning HCMRs as a foundational substrate for reliable and auditable AI-constructed software systems.

arXiv:2603.02949v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Large Language Models are rapidly gaining traction in software engineering, yet their growing carbon footprint raises pressing sustainability concerns. While training emissions are substantial, inference quickly surpasses them due to the sheer volume of prompts processed. This shift underscores the urgent need for accurate, prompt-level carbon measurement during inference to enable informed, sustainability-focused decision-making. To address the limitations of existing approaches, in this paper, we outline the guiding principles for a novel reference framework for LLM inference carbon estimation that can guide the design of future tools and provide a systematic foundation for advancing sustainability research in this domain. We also introduce SEAL, an early embodiment of these principles that leverages a multi-benchmark-driven approach for per-prompt carbon estimation. Its initial validation shows promising results, positioning SEAL as a foundation for standardized sustainability assessment across the LLM ecosystem.

arXiv:2603.03180v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Automated industrial optimization modeling requires reliable translation of natural-language requirements into solver-executable code. However, large language models often generate non-compilable models due to missing declarations, type inconsistencies, and incomplete dependency contexts. We propose a type-aware retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) method that enforces modeling entity types and minimal dependency closure to ensure executability. Unlike existing RAG approaches that index unstructured text, our method constructs a domain-specific typed knowledge base by parsing heterogeneous sources, such as academic papers and solver code, into typed units and encoding their mathematical dependencies in a knowledge graph. Given a natural-language instruction, it performs hybrid retrieval and computes a minimal dependency-closed context, the smallest set of typed symbols required for solver-executable code, via dependency propagation over the graph. We validate the method on two constraint-intensive industrial cases: demand response optimization in battery production and flexible job shop scheduling. In the first case, our method generates an executable model incorporating demand-response incentives and load-reduction constraints, achieving peak shaving while preserving profitability; conventional RAG baselines fail. In the second case, it consistently produces compilable models that reach known optimal solutions, demonstrating robust cross-domain generalization; baselines fail entirely. Ablation studies confirm that enforcing type-aware dependency closure is essential for avoiding structural hallucinations and ensuring executability, addressing a critical barrier to deploying large language models in complex engineering optimization tasks.

arXiv:2602.24055v2 Announce Type: replace Abstract: This paper proposes CIRCLE, a six-stage, lifecycle-based framework to bridge the reality gap between model-centric performance metrics and AI's materialized outcomes in deployment. While existing frameworks like MLOps focus on system stability and benchmarks measure abstract capabilities, decision-makers outside the AI stack lack systematic evidence about the behavior of AI technologies under real-world user variability and constraints. CIRCLE operationalizes the Validation phase of TEVV (Test, Evaluation, Verification, and Validation) by formalizing the translation of stakeholder concerns outside the stack into measurable signals. Unlike participatory design, which often remains localized, or algorithmic audits, which are often retrospective, CIRCLE provides a structured, prospective protocol for linking context-sensitive qualitative insights to scalable quantitative metrics. By integrating methods such as field testing, red teaming, and longitudinal studies into a coordinated pipeline, CIRCLE produces systematic knowledge: evidence that is comparable across sites yet sensitive to local context. This can enable governance based on materialized downstream effects rather than theoretical capabilities.

arXiv:2510.18560v3 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: The paradigm of LLM-as-a-judge is emerging as a scalable and efficient alternative to human evaluation, demonstrating strong performance on well-defined tasks. However, its reliability in open-ended tasks with dynamic environments and complex interactions remains unexplored. To bridge the gap, we introduce WebDevJudge, a systematic benchmark for assessing LLM-as-a-judge performance in web development, with support for both non-interactive evaluation based on static observations and continuous interactive evaluation with a dynamic web environment. WebDevJudge comprises human preference labels over paired web implementations, annotated with structured and query-grounded rubrics to ensure high-quality ground truth. Using this benchmark, we comprehensively evaluate various evaluators, including LLMs, MLLMs, and agentic workflows. We systematically investigate the impact of different paradigms and guidance mechanisms. Our experiments reveal a significant gap between LLM judges and human experts. In-depth analysis indicates this gap stems from fundamental model limitations, including failures in recognizing functional equivalence, verifying task feasibility, and mitigating bias. Overall, WebDevJudge presents a challenge to LLM-as-a-judge, offering insights to guide future research toward developing more reliable and capable automated evaluators for complicated scenarios. Code and data are available at https://github.com/lcy2723/WebDevJudge.

arXiv:2510.25015v4 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: We introduce VeriStruct, a novel framework that extends AI-assisted automated verification from single functions to more complex data structure modules in Verus. VeriStruct employs a planner module to orchestrate the systematic generation of abstractions, type invariants, specifications, and proof code. To address the challenge that LLMs often misunderstand Verus' annotation syntax and verification-specific semantics, VeriStruct embeds syntax guidance within prompts and includes a repair stage to automatically correct annotation errors. In an evaluation on eleven Rust data structure modules, VeriStruct succeeds on ten of the eleven, successfully verifying 128 out of 129 functions (99.2%) in total. These results represent an important step toward the goal of automatic AI-assisted formal verification.