SmartEval: A Benchmark for Evaluating LLM-Generated Smart Contracts from Natural Language Specifications

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.09610v1
• Date: Sun, 10 May 2026 15:47:46 GMT
• Title: SmartEval: A Benchmark for Evaluating LLM-Generated Smart Contracts from Natural Language Specifications
• Abstract summary: We introduce SmartEval, a benchmark for systematically evaluating the quality of Solidity smart contracts generated by large language models (LLMs)<n>SmartEval provides a corpus of 9,000 generated contracts paired with expert-written ground-truth implementations drawn from the FSMSCG dataset.<n>To validate the benchmark's reliability, we conduct three independent empirical studies.
• Score: 5.027278762864141
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: We introduce SmartEval, a benchmark for systematically evaluating the quality of Solidity smart contracts generated by large language models (LLMs) from natural language specifications. SmartEval provides a corpus of 9,000 generated contracts paired with expert-written ground-truth implementations drawn from the FSMSCG dataset, a five-dimensional evaluation rubric covering functional completeness, variable fidelity, state-machine correctness, business-logic fidelity, and code quality, and a reproducible generation-and-evaluation pipeline. To validate the benchmark's reliability, we conduct three independent empirical studies: a five-condition ablation study (N=300 per condition) isolating the contribution of each pipeline component, a human expert evaluation by three Columbia University PhD researchers confirming automated scores align with expert judgment to within 0.34 points, and external security analysis via the Slither static analyzer confirming 79.4% agreement between the LLM auditor and a non-LLM rule-based tool. Systematic analysis of 9,000 generated contracts reveals characteristic failure modes (logic omissions at 35.3%, state transition errors at 23.4%, and complexity-driven degradation) and quantifies a +8.29 composite-score advantage of generated contracts over ground-truth implementations, attributable to LLMs' literal specification-following behavior. SmartEval establishes a reproducible, validated foundation for empirical research on LLM smart contract synthesis quality, with all data, evaluation code, and generated contracts publicly released.

Related papers

• Towards LLM-assisted High-Quality Property Generation for Solidity Smart Contracts [0.7929185276093964]
  This studyleverages Large Language Models to generate high-quality properties for Soliditybased smart contracts.<n>We evaluate LLMs using various prompting techniques (e.g., zero shot, few shot, and prompt chaining)<n>Overall, we find that Gemini Pro 1.5, when combined with prompt chaining, achieves the highest average mutation score of 25.99%.<n>However, our per contract analysis reveals notable variance, particularly for the LibBit contract, where Gemini Pro 1.5 under prompt chaining achieves a mutation score of 74.34%.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-07-25T17:49:49Z)
• LLMEval-Logic: A Solver-Verified Chinese Benchmark for Logical Reasoning of LLMs with Adversarial Hardening [69.1037790901185]
  We present LLMEval-Logic, a Chinese logical reasoning benchmark built from realistic situational scenarios.<n>Its pipeline forward-authors and expert-audits natural-language items together with their reference formalizations, verifies annotated answers with Z3, constructs expert rubrics for natural-to-formal grading, and hardens selected items through a closed-loop adversarial workflow.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-05-19T09:40:29Z)
• ComplexMCP: Evaluation of LLM Agents in Dynamic, Interdependent, and Large-Scale Tool Sandbox [61.862814740220806]
  $textbfComplexMCP$ is a benchmark designed to evaluate agents in rigorous conditions.<n>Built on the Model Context Protocol (MCP), $textbfComplexMCP$ provides over 300 meticulously tested tools.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-05-11T16:20:51Z)
• Encyclo-K: Evaluating LLMs with Dynamically Composed Knowledge Statements [78.87065404966002]
  Existing benchmarks predominantly curate questions at the question level.<n>We propose Encyclo-K, a statement-based benchmark that rethinks benchmark construction from the ground up.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-12-31T13:55:54Z)
• Beyond Code Similarity: Benchmarking the Plausibility, Efficiency, and Complexity of LLM-Generated Smart Contracts [3.3672086394822762]
  LLMs produce code with high semantic similarity to real contracts.<n>Only 20% to 26% of zero-shot generations behave identically to ground-truth implementations under testing.<n>Retrieval-Augmented Generation markedly improves performance, boosting functional correctness by up to 45%.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-11-20T10:47:59Z)
• AutoMalDesc: Large-Scale Script Analysis for Cyber Threat Research [81.04845910798387]
  Generating natural language explanations for threat detections remains an open problem in cybersecurity research.<n>We present AutoMalDesc, an automated static analysis summarization framework that operates independently at scale.<n>We publish our complete dataset of more than 100K script samples, including annotated seed (0.9K) datasets, along with our methodology and evaluation framework.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-11-17T13:05:25Z)
• FLAMES: Fine-tuning LLMs to Synthesize Invariants for Smart Contract Security [41.836337574143535]
  FLAMES is an automated approach that synthesizes runtime guards as Solidity "require" statements to harden smart contracts against exploits.<n>FLAMES employs domain-adapted large language models trained through fill-in-the-middle supervised fine-tuning on real-world invariants extracted from 514,506 verified contracts.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-10-24T12:44:08Z)
• LLMEval-3: A Large-Scale Longitudinal Study on Robust and Fair Evaluation of Large Language Models [51.55869466207234]
  Existing evaluation of Large Language Models (LLMs) on static benchmarks is vulnerable to data contamination and leaderboard overfitting.<n>We introduce LLMEval-3, a framework for dynamic evaluation of LLMs.<n>LLEval-3 is built on a proprietary bank of 220k graduate-level questions, from which it dynamically samples unseen test sets for each evaluation run.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-08-07T14:46:30Z)
• A Confidence-Diversity Framework for Calibrating AI Judgement in Accessible Qualitative Coding Tasks [0.0]
  Confidence-diversity calibration is a quality assessment framework for accessible coding tasks.<n>Analysing 5,680 coding decisions from eight state-of-the-art LLMs, we find that mean self-confidence tracks inter-model agreement closely.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-08-04T03:47:10Z)
• AutoLogi: Automated Generation of Logic Puzzles for Evaluating Reasoning Abilities of Large Language Models [86.83875864328984]
  We propose an automated method for synthesizing open-ended logic puzzles, and use it to develop a bilingual benchmark, AutoLogi.<n>Our approach features program-based verification and controllable difficulty levels, enabling more reliable evaluation that better distinguishes models' reasoning abilities.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-02-24T07:02:31Z)

This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.

This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.