Protocol-Driven Development: Governing Generated Software Through Invariants and Continuous Evidence

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.12981v3
• Date: Tue, 19 May 2026 08:37:24 GMT
• Title: Protocol-Driven Development: Governing Generated Software Through Invariants and Continuous Evidence
• Abstract summary: We introduce Protocol-Driven Development (PDD), where the primary software artifact is a machine-enforceable protocol rather than code.<n>PDD defines a governance model for automated software engineering.
• Score: 2.124730017640531
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: Automated program synthesis lowers the cost of producing implementations but introduces a harder governance problem: determining which generated artifacts are admissible. Natural-language specifications are ambiguous, and example-based tests sample only part of the behavioral space. Used alone, neither provides a sufficient control boundary. We introduce Protocol-Driven Development (PDD), where the primary software artifact is a machine-enforceable protocol rather than code. We define a protocol as the triplet P = (S, B, O), specifying structural, behavioral, and operational invariants. Their conjunction defines the admissible implementation space of a software component. Under PDD, implementations are replaceable realizations discovered through constrained search. An implementation is admitted only if it satisfies the protocol and produces a verifiable Evidence Chain of compliance. Admission is grounded in protocol satisfaction and recorded evidence rather than trust in the generator. For deployed systems, we extend the Evidence Chain into a Dynamic Evidence Ledger. Runtime verifiers append signed observations, invariant checks, and violations to the ledger, allowing monitorable obligations to be continuously attested. This connects live failures back to the generation loop without granting the generator runtime authority. Combining formal methods, property testing, runtime verification, policy-as-code, and software provenance, PDD defines a governance model for automated software engineering. Its organizing principle is that code is transient, while the protocol carries durable authority.

Related papers

• $Z^2$-ACT: End-to-End Verifiable Agentic Intent Control for Open 6G RAN [43.15181031994434]
  We propose a zero-knowledge auditable control and zero-trust verifiable agentic intent architecture.<n>A live large language model is used in the non-real-time path to translate operator intents into Intent Contracts.<n>Results indicate improved actuation filtering and attack resilience at modest latency and signaling cost.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-08-21T12:44:03Z)
• Vero: Can AI Agents Build Formally Verified Software Repositories? [45.09790101960906]
  Vero is the first benchmark to evaluate joint implementation and proof at the repository level.<n>It contains 43 multi-module instances from real-world repositories spanning Python, Dafny, Verus, and Coq.<n>To improve benchmark reliability, Vero also includes an audit mechanism where agents are allowed to formally prove unsatisfiability of provided specification.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-08-13T17:41:27Z)
• Constraint-Driven Synthesis of Hyper Petri Nets [46.9047309711542]
  This paper addresses the modeling and synthesis of constrained robotic system behaviors using Petri nets (PNs)<n>It investigates how to construct models in which all observable system states satisfy given logical constraints while remaining consistent with executable transition semantics.<n>The proposed method introduces an explicit execution semantics over observable states, induced by admissible (atomic) firing sequences.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-07-24T07:57:19Z)
• PhyAgentOS: A Self-Evolving Operating System for Embodied Agents with Decoupled Cognitive Planning and Physical Execution [49.776611937968]
  We present PhyAgentOS, a foundation delivering scheduling, verification, memory, benchmarking, and safety as system-level services.<n>Its Session-Centered treats a session, not an action, as the minimum unit of scheduling, compatibility, supervised execution, evidence collection, and acceptance.<n>SessionVerifier distinguishes execution termination from semantic task completion via evidence-grounded verdicts of success, failure, or replan.<n> Benchmarking reuses the deployment session and verification path, so results trace to real execution.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-07-18T04:46:53Z)
• CAVA: Canonical Action Verification and Attestation for Runtime Governance of Agentic AI Systems [0.6526824510982799]
  This paper presents a runtime-semantics layer for converting heterogeneous agent activity into canonical runtime objects.<n>The contribution is a systems formulation of action-level canonicalization and policy-addressable semantic patterns as a necessary substrate for deployer-side AI governance.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-07-15T11:34:34Z)
• Proof-Carrying Agent Actions: Model-Agnostic Runtime Governance for Heterogeneous Agent Systems [0.6526824510982799]
  This paper presents Proof-Carrying Agent Actions (PCAA), a runtime-neutral governance model centered on an action certificate.<n>PCAA organizes control around five checkpoints: pre-action admissibility, action open, assumption capture, approval, and outcome closure.<n>We study the model through a reference implementation in a heterogeneous agent control plane and a disclosure-bounded evaluation protocol.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-06-02T18:10:35Z)
• Autogenesis: A Self-Evolving Agent Protocol [60.15939127351914]
  We introduce Autogenesis Protocol (AGP), a self evolution protocol that decouples what evolves from how evolution occurs.<n>We present Autogenesis System (AGS), a self-evolving multi-agent system that dynamically instantiates, retrieves, and refines protocol-registered resources during execution.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-04-16T14:04:06Z)
• REGAL: A Registry-Driven Architecture for Deterministic Grounding of Agentic AI in Enterprise Telemetry [0.0]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) enable new forms of agentic automation.<n>We present REGAL, a registry-driven architecture for deterministic grounding of agentic AI systems in enterprise telemetry.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-03-03T14:13:39Z)
• BRIDGE: Building Representations In Domain Guided Program Verification [67.36686119518441]
  BRIDGE decomposes verification into three interconnected domains: Code, Specifications, and Proofs.<n>We show that this approach substantially improves both accuracy and efficiency beyond standard error feedback methods.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-11-26T06:39:19Z)
• LLM-Assisted Model-Based Fuzzing of Protocol Implementations [9.512044399020514]
  Faults in protocol behavior can lead to vulnerabilities and system failures.<n>A common approach to protocol testing involves constructing Markovian models that capture the state transitions and expected behaviors of the protocol.<n>We propose a novel method that leverages large language models (LLMs) to automatically generate sequences for testing network protocol implementations.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-08-03T13:16:18Z)
• ProtocolLLM: RTL Benchmark for SystemVerilog Generation of Communication Protocols [45.66401695351214]
  We introduce ProtocolLLM, the first benchmark suite specifically targeting widely used SystemVerilog protocols.<n>We observe that most of the models fail to generate SystemVerilog code for communication protocols that follow timing constrains.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-06-09T17:10:47Z)
• ModelForge: Using GenAI to Improve the Development of Security Protocols [1.9241821314180376]
  We introduce ModelForge, a novel tool that automates the translation of protocol specifications.<n>By leveraging advances in Natural Language Processing (NLP) and Generative AI (GenAI), ModelForge processes protocol specifications and generates a CPSA protocol definition.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-06-08T06:27:09Z)
• Validating Network Protocol Parsers with Traceable RFC Document Interpretation [11.081773172066766]
  oracle and traceability problems determine when a protocol implementation can be considered buggy.<n>This work considers both and provides an effective solution using recent advances in large language models (LLMs)<n>We have extensively evaluated our approach using nine network protocols and their implementations written in C, Python, and Go.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-04-25T03:39:19Z)
• Keeping Behavioral Programs Alive: Specifying and Executing Liveness Requirements [2.4387555567462647]
  We propose an idiom for tagging states with "must-finish," indicating that tasks are yet to be completed. We also offer semantics and two execution mechanisms, one based on a translation to B"uchi automata and the other based on a Markov decision process (MDP)
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-04-02T11:36:58Z)
• Towards an Enforceable GDPR Specification [49.1574468325115]
  Privacy by Design (PbD) is prescribed by modern privacy regulations such as the EU's. One emerging technique to realize PbD is enforcement (RE) We present a set of requirements and an iterative methodology for creating formal specifications of legal provisions.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-02-27T09:38:51Z)
• Towards Semantic Communication Protocols: A Probabilistic Logic Perspective [69.68769942563812]
  We propose a semantic protocol model (SPM) constructed by transforming an NPM into an interpretable symbolic graph written in the probabilistic logic programming language (ProbLog) By leveraging its interpretability and memory-efficiency, we demonstrate several applications such as SPM reconfiguration for collision-avoidance.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-07-08T14:19:36Z)

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.