AssumptionMiner: Extracting, Tracing, and Revising Implicit Assumptions in LLM Code Generation

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2607.22898v1
• Date: Fri, 24 Jul 2026 20:22:59 GMT
• Title: AssumptionMiner: Extracting, Tracing, and Revising Implicit Assumptions in LLM Code Generation
• Abstract summary: We present AssumptionMiner, a framework that makes implicit assumptions a first-class artifact of large language models (LLMs)<n>In addition to code, AssumptionMiner produces an explicit assumption layer, a structured representation of inferred constraints and design decisions.<n>We evaluate assumption extraction, code localization, and assumption-guided regeneration.
• Score: 0.5414847001704249
• License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
• Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) generate code from natural-language prompts, yet real-world prompts rarely provide complete specifications. When prompts leave input formats, error handling, or design decisions unspecified, LLMs fill these gaps with implicit assumptions that shape the generated code's behavior and correctness. Because these assumptions remain hidden, generated code may satisfy tests while violating developer intent. We present AssumptionMiner, a framework that makes implicit assumptions a first-class artifact of LLM-based code generation. In addition to code, AssumptionMiner produces an explicit assumption layer, a structured representation of inferred constraints and design decisions that developers can inspect, confirm, or revise. An AST-based dependency graph enables targeted regeneration of only the code affected by a revised assumption. We also introduce a benchmark of 180 ambiguous programming tasks with 676 annotated assumptions, including a human-verified subset for evaluating code localization. We evaluate assumption extraction, code localization, and assumption-guided regeneration. Across open-source LLMs, a confidence-weighted ensemble achieves an F1 score of 0.816 for assumption extraction, improving on the strongest offline baseline by 3.6x. On the human-verified localization benchmark, AST-guided localization identifies more precise code regions than keyword-based and whole-file baselines. During assumption revision, targeted regeneration modifies less code than non-targeted alternatives while exposing challenges in handling cascading edits. These results demonstrate that making assumptions explicit improves the transparency and controllability of LLM-based code generation.

Related papers

• Weave of Formal Thought [51.56484100374058]
  We introduce Weave of Formal Thought (WoFT), a paradigm uniting rigorous syntactic validation with learned structural representations.<n>We present a latent-variable fine-tuning method training the language model to interleave non-terminal grammar symbols directly into generation.<n>For Python, fine-tuning StarCoder2-3B with our RWS objective reduces per-token cross-entropy by 14.3% relative to a text-only SFT baseline.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-06-24T15:58:11Z)
• Task Abstention for Large Language Models in Code Generation [16.35286288670945]
  Large language models (LLMs) have revolutionized automated code generation.<n>One serious concern is the so-called hallucination''<n>We study the task abstention problem, i.e., determining whether a given LLM should abstain from performing a specific code generation task to avoid likely hallucination.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-05-16T14:58:11Z)
• RepoZero: Can LLMs Generate a Code Repository from Scratch? [13.87780777614509]
  RepoZero is the first benchmark that enables fully automated, execution-based verification of repository-level generation from scratch.<n>Our results establish RepoZero as a challenging, scalable, and reliable testbed for end-to-end code generation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-05-08T01:56:02Z)
• 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)
• Are LLMs Reliable Code Reviewers? Systematic Overcorrection in Requirement Conformance Judgement [8.059802912761919]
  We uncover a systematic failure of large language models (LLMs) in matching code to natural language requirements.<n>More detailed prompt design, particularly with those requiring explanations and proposed corrections, leads to higher misjudgment rates.<n>We propose a Fix-guided Verification Filter that treats the model proposed fix as executable counterfactual evidence.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-02-28T08:35:25Z)
• Reasoning with Confidence: Efficient Verification of LLM Reasoning Steps via Uncertainty Heads [104.9566359759396]
  We propose a lightweight alternative for step-level reasoning verification based on data-driven uncertainty scores.<n>Our findings suggest that the internal states of LLMs encode their uncertainty and can serve as reliable signals for reasoning verification.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-11-09T03:38:29Z)
• 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)
• IFEvalCode: Controlled Code Generation [69.28317223249358]
  The paper introduces forward and backward constraints generation to improve the instruction-following capabilities of Code LLMs.<n>The authors present IFEvalCode, a multilingual benchmark comprising 1.6K test samples across seven programming languages.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-07-30T08:08:48Z)
• Correctness Assessment of Code Generated by Large Language Models Using Internal Representations [4.32362000083889]
  We introduce OPENIA, a novel framework to assess the correctness of code generated by Large Language Models (LLMs)<n>Our empirical analysis reveals that these internal representations encode latent information, which strongly correlates with the correctness of the generated code.<n> OPENIA consistently outperforms baseline models, achieving higher accuracy, precision, recall, and F1-Scores with up to a 2X improvement in standalone code generation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-01-22T15:04:13Z)
• Self-Evaluation Improves Selective Generation in Large Language Models [54.003992911447696]
  We reformulate open-ended generation tasks into token-level prediction tasks. We instruct an LLM to self-evaluate its answers. We benchmark a range of scoring methods based on self-evaluation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-12-14T19:09:22Z)
• Fixing Large Language Models' Specification Misunderstanding for Better Code Generation [13.494822086550604]
  muFiX is a novel prompting technique to improve the code generation performance of large language models (LLMs)<n>It first exploits test case analysis to obtain specification understanding and enables a self-improvement process.<n>muFiX further fixes the specification understanding towards the direction reducing the gap between the provided understanding and the actual understanding.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-09-28T02:58:07Z)

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.