Agentic Model Checking

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.21434v1
• Date: Wed, 20 May 2026 17:25:52 GMT
• Title: Agentic Model Checking
• Abstract summary: We propose a paradigm that couples LLM agents with a bounded model checking backend.<n>We instantiate the approach in BMC-Agent and evaluate it on LLM-generated kernel and compiler code in C and Rust.
• Score: 12.832868209928039
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: Verifying LLM-generated systems code is hard: bugs are prevalent, formal specifications are missing, and safety contracts are encoded implicitly at call sites rather than enforced at function boundaries. We propose agentic model checking, a paradigm that couples LLM agents with a bounded model checking backend under the principle agents propose, solvers verify: agents handle tasks requiring semantic judgment (spec inference, check selection, counterexample classification, refinement proposal) while BMC discharges every soundness-relevant decision. The paradigm rests on three commitments. Specifications are inferred top-down from caller context in a restricted DSL that translates deterministically into the backend's assume/assert primitives, with optional functional-correctness clauses lifting verification from panic-freeness to behavioural faithfulness. Verification is compositional: each function is checked in isolation against its spec with callees replaced by postcondition-constrained stubs, so per-query cost scales with a single function's state space and refinements propagate automatically to callers. Counterexamples are not bug reports: they pass through a validation pipeline (reachability, callee feasibility, dynamic replay, realism audit) that distinguishes active in-tree crashes from latent public-API failures, while modelling artifacts drive a refinement loop rather than being suppressed. We instantiate the approach in BMC-Agent and evaluate it on LLM-generated kernel and compiler code in C and Rust alongside mature OSS-Fuzz-hardened libraries, confirming real defects, producing bounded clean verifications on heavily-fuzzed surfaces, and establishing functional equivalence on selected algorithmic functions.

Related papers

• PluginEval: A Diagnostic Benchmark for Fine-Grained Error Attribution in Function Calling [11.1017602726296]
  Large Language Models increasingly operate as autonomous agents.<n>Current benchmarks face three structural limitations.<n>Eval is a benchmark constructed through a two-stage framework.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-08-09T13:25:54Z)
• Formal Verification of Agentic Systems over Operational Data [59.98246281888422]
  Agentic systems driven by large language models (LLMs) are increasingly deployed in real-world where they act on persistent operational data.<n>Existing approaches do not provide such system-level guarantees.<n>We study here the verification of agentic systems comprising a single LLM and a tool orchestration harness over relational operational data.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-08-04T13:01:30Z)
• Towards Automated Formal Verification of zkEVMs Using LLM-Guided Constraint Synthesis [14.825615940318038]
  ZkEVMs generate zero-knowledge that guarantee off-chain execution correctness.<n> subtle implementation bugs can lead to valid proofs certifying semantically faulty states.<n>Formal verification via SMT solvers can prevent this, but is bottlenecked by specification.<n>We propose Veri Synth, a framework that synthesizes executable Python/Z3 verification models from Rust.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-07-22T06:20:36Z)
• 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)
• Kani: A Model Checker for Rust [3.019677299390329]
  Kani is an open-source model checker for Rust.<n>It pushes bounded model checking beyond bug-finding to provide correctness guarantees.<n>Kani operates at scale in production CI, with over 16,000 harnesses verified per code change.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-07-01T22:05:33Z)
• What to Test Next: Interpretable Coverage Gap Discovery in Driving VLMs [52.50210189669399]
  Driving vision-language models (VLMs) must accurately understand scenes across diverse conditions defined by Operational Design Domains (ODDs)<n>We propose SliceScorer, a deterministic scoring rule for missing-slice recommendation.<n>We show that SliceNav surfaces high-risk coverage gaps more effectively than prior slice-discovery methods.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-06-01T03:18:01Z)
• VerifyMAS: Hypothesis Verification for Failure Attribution in LLM Multi-Agent Systems [79.51005192758262]
  Large language model-driven multi-agent systems excel at complex tasks.<n>However, unreliable agents remain a key bottleneck to system-level reliability.<n>We propose a hypothesis verification framework for agent failure attribution.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-05-17T14:09:35Z)
• Methods for Formal Verification of Agent Skills: Three Layers Toward a Mechanically Checkable Capability-Containment Proof [0.0]
  We give a precise semantics for skill behaviour faithful to how a skill is consumed by an LLM-driven runtime.<n>We present three composable methods that together raise a skill from declared or tested to formal.<n>All three methods plus the bundle producer and re-checker ship as zero-dependency JavaScript modules in the open-source enclawed framework.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-05-09T19:27:38Z)
• The Context Gathering Decision Process: A POMDP Framework for Agentic Search [38.92972416925679]
  Large Language Model (LLM) agents are deployed in complex environments.<n>Without explicit infrastructure, an agent's working memory can degrade into lossy representations of the search state.<n>We formalize this challenge as the Context Gathering Decision Process (CGDP)<n>We derive two plug-and-play interventions for iterative LLM agents.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-05-07T23:45:07Z)
• LiveFMBench: Unveiling the Power and Limits of Agentic Workflows in Specification Generation [75.05397479715576]
  Large language models (LLMs) and agents have shown promising progress, but their true capabilities and failure modes remain unclear.<n>We present the first systematic and contamination-aware study of LLM- and agent-based formal specification generation for C programs.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-05-02T11:31:33Z)
• Beyond Code Reasoning: Specification-Anchored Auditing of Multi-Implementation Distributed Protocols [1.5229705287183657]
  SPECA is an audit framework that derives explicit, categorized security properties from natural-language specifications and reuses them across implementations.<n>On the RepoAudit benchmark, SPECA reaches 88.9% precision at 100% recall (F1=0.94) and surfaces 12 author-validated bugs beyond ground truth.<n>On the Sherlock Fusaka Audit Contest (10 targets, 366 submissions), SPECA recovers all 15 vulnerabilities expert-augmented and surfaces 4 fix-confirmed bugs.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-04-29T09:57:07Z)
• Dynamic analysis enhances issue resolution [53.50448142467294]
  DAIRA (Dynamic Analysis-enhanced Issue Resolution Agent) is an automated repair framework that embeds dynamic analysis into the agent's reasoning cycle.<n> Driven by a Test Tracing-Driven methodology, DAIRA utilizes lightweight monitors to extract critical runtime data.<n>When powered by Gemini 3 Flash Preview, DAIRA establishes a new state-of-the-art (SOTA) performance, achieving a 79.4% resolution rate on the SWE-bench Verified dataset.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-03-23T14:48:54Z)
• A Trace-Based Assurance Framework for Agentic AI Orchestration: Contracts, Testing, and Governance [0.22940141855172028]
  This paper presents an assurance framework for Agentic AI systems using Large Language Models (LLMs)<n>Executions are instrumented as Message-Action Traces (MAT) with explicit step and trace contracts.<n>The framework includes stress testing, formulated as a budgeted counterexample search over bounded perturbations.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-03-18T10:23:48Z)
• RULERS: Locked Rubrics and Evidence-Anchored Scoring for Robust LLM Evaluation [15.787947727055611]
  We introduce RULERS, a compiler-executor framework that transforms natural language rubrics into executable specifications.<n>RULERS operates by compiling criteria into versioned immutable bundles, enforcing structured decoding with deterministic evidence verification, and applying lightweight Wasserstein-based post-hoc calibration.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-01-13T15:31:42Z)
• CompassVerifier: A Unified and Robust Verifier for LLMs Evaluation and Outcome Reward [50.97588334916863]
  We develop CompassVerifier, an accurate and robust lightweight verifier model for evaluation and outcome reward.<n>It demonstrates multi-domain competency spanning math, knowledge, and diverse reasoning tasks, with the capability to process various answer types.<n>We introduce VerifierBench benchmark comprising model outputs collected from multiple data sources, augmented through manual analysis of metaerror patterns to enhance CompassVerifier.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-08-05T17:55:24Z)
• Retrieval is Not Enough: Enhancing RAG Reasoning through Test-Time Critique and Optimization [58.390885294401066]
  Retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) has become a widely adopted paradigm for enabling knowledge-grounded large language models (LLMs)<n>RAG pipelines often fail to ensure that model reasoning remains consistent with the evidence retrieved, leading to factual inconsistencies or unsupported conclusions.<n>We propose AlignRAG, a novel iterative framework grounded in Critique-Driven Alignment (CDA)<n>We introduce AlignRAG-auto, an autonomous variant that dynamically terminates refinement, removing the need to pre-specify the number of critique iterations.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-04-21T04:56:47Z)

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.