Papers

In mainstream agent frameworks, a step ends when the agent's own output says it has finished. Durable-execution platforms bound retries and time, but their checker conventionally lives in the same codebase as the work: a discipline the deployment is trusted to keep, not a property the harness enforces. We state what an agent harness must guarantee, prove it, and build the instrument that measures whether a harness delivers it. A bounded loop is a worker, an independent gate the worker cannot write to, and a declared budget; a bounded-loop graph composes them with a repair relation that lets a downstream failure re-run a finished upstream node. Three guarantees follow. It finishes: termination holds under repair, with the worst-case attempt total in closed form, if the repair budget is global not per node. It does not drift: no node reaches DONE without a gate verdict in an append-only hash-chained ledger, proved from control flow, since repair leaves no topological order to induct along. It does not overspend: the ceiling is enforced inside an attempt, not between attempts. Gates are measured against a two-tier held-out mutant corpus. We characterise two classes that let a sound-looking check pass anything: vacuity, satisfied by the absence of the thing checked, and self-attestation, where the subject supplies the value the check is applied to. On a 69-loop catalogue the instrument found 47 vacuous gates in shipped, reviewed code. Against the repaired gates it reports no false accepts over 209 destroying mutants ($\alpha \le 1.8\%$, Wilson 95%); that figure is saturation, not quality: freezing the gates and applying a fresh operator family recovers a 23.3% false-accept rate where the exhausted corpus reported none. A rate belongs to a specific gate; the apparatus, not our number, is the contribution. Engine, catalogue and corpus are Apache-2.0.

Repository-level issue-resolution benchmarks have made executable evaluation central to software-engineering agents, but their language coverage remains concentrated in mainstream ecosystems. Pony presents a different regime: it combines actors, reference capabilities, ahead-of-time compilation, and a rapidly evolving historical toolchain, making both patch generation and faithful replay difficult. We introduce PonyEval, a SWE-bench-style benchmark of 291 real GitHub issue-pull-request pairs from 15 Pony repositories. Every instance binds an issue statement, a historical base commit, a developer gold patch, a black-box test patch, and a reproducible runtime mapping. The frozen release passes an offline audit requiring the issue-specific test to fail on the base state and pass after the gold patch; it contains no duplicate instance identifiers or canonical repository-PR pairs. In a separate full-set semantic selection audit, three isolated machine reviewers label all 291 instances as include or exclude; their Fleiss' kappa is 0.8968, with 249 unanimous inclusions and 32 unanimous exclusions. To replay eleven years of repository history, we reconstruct 72 runtime images covering 289 unique base commits and verify their availability on five heterogeneous compute nodes. We define a matched evaluation with mini-SWE-agent 2.4.6 for GPT-5.6-sol, DeepSeek-V4-Pro, GLM-5.2, MiniMax-M3, and Kimi-K3, followed by strict patch application, compilation, and hidden-test validation. Across the patches actually produced by each model, conditional resolution rates range from 10.21% to 24.68%. These rates characterize the quality of generated patches rather than success over all 291 benchmark tasks.

Code obfuscation is widely used in software systems and malware to conceal program logic and hinder analysis, posing significant challenges for both human developers and automated tools. While large language models (LLMs) have shown strong capabilities in code understanding, their robustness to obfuscation remains poorly understood. Our preliminary study shows that LLM performance significantly degrades on obfuscated code, suggesting a reliance on superficial lexical cues rather than deep semantic reasoning. To address this limitation, we propose CodeSteer, a novel attention steering approach that reallocates model attention toward semantically relevant program elements, including backward slices for output prediction and control-flow paths for execution reasoning. Our method integrates lightweight program analysis with inference-time attention steering to guide LLMs toward the core input-to-output dependencies of a program. Experiments across multiple models and datasets demonstrate that CodeSteer significantly improves performance on obfuscated code, often recovering comparable accuracy to the level of unobfuscated programs. We also show CodeSteer's practical utility through a case study on buffer overflow detection, highlighting its potential for malware/vulnerability analysis and reverse engineering of obfuscated code.

Frontier models have collapsed the cost of writing custom code: a niche problem a specialist sees in their own domain now costs an afternoon. The cost of reviewing and maintaining that code hasn't collapsed. Each solution drifts from the next; understanding one means reading its codebase from scratch. Large enterprises build something centrally governed instead: at worst an off-the-shelf product, at best a graph-orchestration framework wired bespoke per use case, or a low-code platform used as the orchestrator. These are custom every time and limited in scope. Enterprises don't weigh a third option that escapes both constraints: the harness paradigm. Recent work treats the coding-agent harness as enterprise infrastructure rather than a coding tool, converging on three findings: harnesses suffice at the task level and outperform more elaborate architectures on enterprise work (arXiv:2604.00073, arXiv:2604.13107); harness choice accounts for most of the variance in agent benchmark results, more than model choice does (arXiv:2605.23950); and the gap between that finding and enterprise adoption is governance (arXiv:2605.10223, arXiv:2605.18747). We propose an architecture that closes that gap. One harness runs unmodified as the backbone; the code stays identical across every deployment, so reviewing what gets built collapses to reading its instructions file. Section 4 gives four mechanisms: credential-scoped tooling, where each backend gets one generic request tool and a scoped credential instead of a hand-built method; authorization logic outside the harness, so one artifact runs as a cron backbone, a chat-surface engine, and a terminal tool; registration is a side effect of pushing code, collapsing an audit a review of a text file. Built on microcc (<https://pypi.org/project/micro-cc/>), our reference harness.

Agentic AI systems are being procured for military command and control (C2) under public commitments to rigorous testing and human oversight. Whether such commitments can be discharged depends on their supporting assurance case, which requires three elements: claims specifying the conditions for acceptability, evidence bearing on those claims, and an argument connecting the two. Through a structured review of 240 documented Testing and Evaluation (T&E) practices, spanning eight evaluation dimensions and three lifecycle stages, we identify eight assumptions that established methods make about their test article, grouped into four clusters: system specifiability, stability, composability, and supervisability. Agentic properties weaken all eight assumptions. This erosion affects the argument connecting evidence to claims, not the claims or evidence themselves. As a result, test results may satisfy process requirements, but they do not warrant the inference from tested to fielded behavior. We derive ten assurance claims for the first three assumption clusters and assess whether current and emerging methods can address each, mapping operational consequences through five C2 scenarios. Supervisability is identified but not assessed here, since evidencing it depends on system stability results and human factors T&E methods beyond the present scope. The documented record does not support broad claims about system-level behavior, but narrower claims remain recoverable in principle, contingent on mature methods: bounded mission envelopes, trajectory-grounded correctness, executable runtime constraints, and characterized run-to-run variance. Part of the evidentiary burden shifts into deployment, making the determination to field a continuing act. Where evidence cannot be generated, the residual uncertainty can be governed through defined expiry conditions and assigned ownership.

We introduce FlavorBench: a benchmark for Compiling Dense Deterministic Answer Maps from a Versioned Culinary Embeddings Model. We test 27 frontier large language model endpoints on 534 substitution, pairing and constraining tasks for tasks that request a 3-ingredient portfolio from 8 candidates and score all 56 resulting portfolios. We conducted multiplicity-controlled paired tests on 101 of 351 model contrasts for this task-set. The largest point estimate on this task-set was achieved by Grok 4.6 at 65.1. The same rankings for this task-set were also achieved on several independently-compiled panels (using a variety of familiar metrics, task filters, etc.) and 3 public Epicure checkpoints. We present a 3-seed post-training study where LoRA SFT of a Qwen3-0.6B checkpoint on 270 optimal answers for Epicure to score on this task-set resulted in a 13.3 point gain on 84 anchor-disjoint maps (compared to format and label-matched control; 95% CI: 6.52, 20.29; p = 0.000170).

AutoMOOSE is an agentic software framework that converts a natural-language request into an executed, screened, and interpreted MOOSE phase-field simulation. Here, we deploy AutoMOOSE as a agentic software, complementing our prior work which focused on development of the agentic tool. We describe our software framework and architecture through Use Case and logical views of the 1+5 architectural-views model, covering its user roles, component structure, six-agent pipeline, physics plugin layer, Model Context Protocol interface, and screening/falsification/recovery loop. Our architecture separates physical falsification from automatic repair, so corrected simulations remain inspectable and must be re-admitted before acceptance. We focus on software design, extensibility, interoperability, and reuse of the AutoMoose framework for broad utilization in multiphysics materials design problems.

Continuous deployment to large scale production systems creates a tension between release velocity and reliability. Every change is a potential reliability incident, yet every delay is a missed opportunity. This paper describes the deployment time health check infrastructure that Meta uses to mediate this tension across thousands of heterogeneous services. We summarize the architecture of this prevention based distributed system's service called Service Health Checker, explain how check authors compose templated metric queries, thresholds, and workflow predicates; and discuss how the system is integrated with tiered and phased rollouts so that regressions trigger automatic rollback. We then describe the operational problems that emerged at scale, such as noise, alert fatigue, drift, and uncovered regressions, and the program of measurement, tooling, and improved defaults we deployed to address them. We close with lessons learned from years of operating deployment health checks at Meta, and the directions we are exploring next, including AI assisted health check tuning. Index Terms: deployment safety, continuous deployment, monitoring, software reliability, release engineering, software reliability engineering, AIOps, anomaly detection

Large language model agents increasingly act through terminals, yet existing surveys disperse terminal-mediated behavior across software engineering, tool use, and computer-use research. We regard terminal agents as systems whose dominant progress-bearing action–observation loop is mediated by terminal command execution, textual feedback, and stateful environment interaction. Using terminal-mediated execution as an organizing lens, this survey establishes workload-level boundaries and connects system architecture, competence acquisition, and evaluation through a seven-dimensional terminal competence profile. Our synthesis shows that realized behavior is jointly shaped by the model, interface, harness, runtime, and environment. Executable trajectories ground learning in action consequences, verification, and recovery, whereas prevailing evaluations emphasize final outcomes and expose process quality, recovery, and governance unevenly. Bounded fixed-condition diagnostics illustrate two implications: benchmark families expose different process signals, and matched system comparisons reveal benchmark-dependent performance and limits of component attribution. These findings motivate explicit reporting of system and runtime conditions, supported by replayable traces and process-level evidence. The framework provides a unified basis for studying terminal-mediated agency across software engineering and emerging application domains.

Vibe coding - AI-assisted software development in which the developer describes intent in natural language and validates results by running rather than reading the generated code - was named by Andrej Karpathy in February 2025 and produced its first body of empirical evidence within seventeen months. This state-of-the-art review assembles that evidence across a cross-disciplinary corpus spanning software engineering, human-computer interaction, labour economics, security research, governance, and education. We survey the model landscape, the tool ecosystem, and the performance record by task type, finding the early benchmarks saturated but task-level capability uneven: reliable code generation alongside weak fault detection and hard-to-audit documentation. The productivity record is at first contradictory: peer-reviewed field experiments report +26% more tasks per week, independent randomised trials measure a 19% slowdown, and team-level telemetry shows code-review time up +441%. We argue these readings are consistent once measurement method, scope, and time horizon are held constant, and identify six patterns behind the dispersion, among them effect-shrinkage under broader measurement, self-report diverging from independent measurement, output volume conflated with productivity, and bold claims walked back once tested over longer horizons. We further document security failures in deployed applications, code-quality degradation visible in large-scale code and developer telemetry, unsettled copyright exposure, and evidence of skill atrophy. The review closes with the open research questions and one falsifiable conjecture: that the gains are real on new code and shrink or reverse on mature codebases, which would account for most of the disagreement in the record.

Software form has undergone two paradigm shifts since its inception: Software 1.0, in which instructions determine behavior, and Software 2.0, in which data determines behavior (machine learning). This paper argues that a third shift - Software 3.0, in which context and reasoning determine behavior - is now underway, and contends that its terminal form converges to three elements: a generalized database (the unified abstraction of all persistent state and memory), a large model (the intelligence core that performs reasoning and generation), and an agent (the execution loop connecting the first two). The core argument is as follows: in the traditional three-tier architecture, the user-interface layer will be absorbed by the model's ability to generate interfaces on demand, the business-logic layer will be re-partitioned along "expressibility x criticality" into model reasoning and storage constraints (with residual deterministic logic retained as tools), and only the data layer will be elevated into the sole persistent infrastructure. We formalize this convergence thesis, present a minimal reference architecture, report evidence from real prototypes and a live model, and systematically analyze both the conditions under which it holds and the boundaries where it fails - determinism, cost, security, and verifiability delimit the thesis's domain of applicability. We argue that the thesis holds in task domains that are expressible, verifiable, externally stateful, and tool-complete, and that it will reshape the roles of developers, the database industry, and the software-engineering discipline.

Technical documentation is written for human developers, but an increasing share of software changes is now authored by autonomous coding agents. Which documents they consult, when, and what follows remain unknown. We conduct a behaviour-grounded study of agent-documentation interaction across two public datasets: 557 agentic coding sessions from SWE-chat, yielding 94,813 development events including 3,033 documentation interactions; and 33,097 agentic pull requests from AIDev, with 690,260 classified file-level change records. Four findings challenge current documentation practice. First, agents' documentation work is dominated by agent-facing artefacts: instruction files and working notes account for 60.5% of all documentation interactions, versus 10.6% for classical technical documentation and 1.3% for API references. Second, the link between consultation and code editing is unresolved: the adjacent transition probability is 0.002 and the unadjusted three-event lift 1.05, whereas a stage-adjusted model places it above unity (OR 1.33 [1.09, 1.62]); documentation creation is elevated unadjusted (lift 1.67) but its adjusted interval includes unity. Third, no explicit documentation-based validation sequence was observed, and consultation is associated with less immediate testing (lift 0.23, cluster CI 0.08-0.45; adjusted OR 0.39 [0.25, 0.60]). Fourth, consultation is self-initiated (70.2%) far more often than failure-driven (7.5%), and documentation trails code: among multi-commit pull requests changing both, code is touched first 4.7x more often. From these traces we derive a descriptive model of agent-documentation interaction as a two-lobed cycle rather than a linear journey, and show that two widely assumed properties of "agent-friendly" documentation - actionability and verifiability - lack consistent behavioural support. We release our pipeline, coding scheme, and event-level data.

Open-source libraries play an important role in software development by providing reusable features that expedite the development process. As libraries evolve, they release new versions that add features, fix bugs, or apply security patches. In this process, they may break the contract established with their clients by introducing breaking changes (BCs) that alter the runtime behavior and break client applications. Client-side test suites often fail to detect these BCs because of limited library coverage that does not exercise all library methods used in the client's codebase. We propose BreakGuard, an approach that generates a test suite to detect breaking changes in clients. BreakGuard statically extracts every client method (focal method) that invokes the target library method (call site), then generates tests per focal method. A test detects a BC if it passes on the pre-breaking version and fails on the breaking version. We evaluate our approach on 89 real-world breaking changes from the BUMP dataset, using 3 LLMs (GPT4o, Qwen3-coder-480B, GPT-OSS-120B) and three context levels: minimal, method, and class. Using the best-performing configuration, BreakGuard detects 30.3% of breaking changes (27 of 89) at a mean cost of roughly $0.90 USD per detected breaking change. We successfully detected BCs from different library categories (e.g., JSON libraries, logging, parsing), but we find LLM-generated tests to be more reliable for detecting crash-type breaking changes as opposed to behavioural BCs.

End-to-end automated testing is increasingly used in web software development to ensure system quality and shorten response times during development. However, the true effectiveness of automated testing depends on many factors including execution time, stability of test results, and maintainability of the test suite as the application continues to evolve. In this paper, we evaluate the effectiveness of end-to-end automated testing using the Cypress framework for an open-source web application. We deployed the experiment with 27 test cases. The test's effectiveness is measured by execution speed, reliability, and maintainability. The experimental results show that the Cypress-based end-to-end test suite has short and stable execution times. It suits frequent runs during software development. The majority of test cases achieved consistent results across multiple runs, while flakiness only occurred in a few tests which involve complex interactive functions. Furthermore, the study highlights the impact of element locator strategies and Page Object Model (POM) architecture on test suite maintainability, demonstrating that resilient data-cy attributes significantly reduce maintenance overhead when UI changes occur.

Large language model agents have made substantial progress in code generation, yet most existing systems assume a predefined repository architecture. This assumption does not hold in zero-to-all code generation, where an agent must construct an entire software project directly from natural-language requirements while maintaining a modular repository architecture throughout development. We present Repo0, a continuous structural evolution framework for zero-to-all code generation. Repo0 maintains an explicit architectural state instantiated as a Dual-Directed-Acyclic-Graph (Dual-DAG), consisting of a requirement-level DAG, a component-level DAG, and their alignment relation. Starting from natural-language requirements, it iteratively evolves component boundaries through structural actions guided by modularity metrics until structural convergence, after which the converged architecture guides test-driven development code generation. We evaluate Repo0 on six real-world repositories from RepoCraft using GPT-5 mini and DeepSeek V3.2. Repo0 achieves the highest Functionality Coverage and Pass Rate across all settings. Compared with RPG, the strongest repository-planning baseline, Repo0 improves Functionality Coverage by up to 20.08 percentage points and Pass Rate by up to 29.74 percentage points. Ablation and structural-evolution analyses further demonstrate the importance of the Dual-DAG architectural state, modularity-guided structural evolution, and explicit structural convergence.

The VDM formalism can ensure that models are internally consistent. Potential inconsistencies are highlighted by assertions called proof obligations. This paper is an update to the work described in [1], regarding proof obligation generation for VDM operations. We present the latest work which improves the approach to loop invariants, adds loop variants, improves proof obligations for operation calls, including implicitly declared operations and specification statements, and adds recursive measures for operations. The new features are illustrated with examples.

Software increasingly functions as part of the scientific instrument itself, making failures in scientific code capable of compromising not only program behavior but also the evidence underlying scientific conclusions. Yet existing evaluations of coding agents largely emphasize aggregate task success, providing limited insight into why agents fail when repairing scientific software. We introduce SWE-bench Science, a repository-level benchmark for scientific software engineering comprising 119 tasks from 98 GitHub repositories across 20 scientific domains. Each task is organized into one of three paradigms: Issue-driven, Expert-exploratory, and Engineering-integration. Even the best-performing agent, Claude Code with Opus-5 (max), achieves a pass@1 below 50%, highlighting the substantial challenges posed by scientific software engineering. We identify four recurring failure mechanisms: deficits in scientific knowledge or abstraction, misguided exploration or surface-level repair, incomplete repair coverage or system integration, and failures to generalize scientific knowledge beyond observed cases in our analysis. We further conduct a paired ablation that removes explicit scientific guidance while preserving the repository and executable engineering context. The results show that scientific knowledge is not uniformly beneficial: well-grounded information can constrain repair and improve average performance and token efficiency, whereas poorly aligned guidance can induce anchoring and does not necessarily improve exact repair success. Together, SWE-bench Science provides a broad testbed for studying both the capabilities and failure mechanisms of coding agents in scientific software engineering.

LLM agents have achieved strong performance on general software engineering tasks, yet struggle with domain-specific code generation. We identify the root cause as the agent's lack of tacit knowledge, including domain-specific business rules, interface contracts, and operational conventions that developers internalize through practice but never document. This knowledge is deeply buried beneath the domain code, dispersed across code entities and their dependency relations, and invisible to the agent that lacks it. These properties make tacit knowledge inherently difficult to retrieve or learn. In this work, we propose PRAXIS, a framework that enables agents to systematically extract, represent, and reuse tacit knowledge for domain code generation. PRAXIS acquires tacit knowledge by simulating human development workflows within the target codebase, distills it into structured units organized on the code dependency graph, and proactively surfaces it to the agent at the point of code interaction. Extensive experiments demonstrate that PRAXIS outperforms state-of-the-art agents equipped with powerful agentic search capabilities, as well as experience-based and skill-based methods. The approach integrates seamlessly into various agent frameworks and LLMs with consistent performance improvements, and supports continual evolution with performance steadily scaling as practice accumulates.

Testing embedded software in modern vehicles is challenging due to system complexity, decentralized architectures, and strict safety and performance constraints. In this work, we present an end-to-end, deployment-aware testing pipeline for IoT-based automotive applications. The pipeline combines requirement-driven test and code generation with large language model (LLM) and vision-language model (VLM) assistance, and human-in-the-loop curation to reduce manual effort and improve consistency. Using Eclipse openDuT, it supports flexible, distributed deployment across geographically separated cyber-physical and IoT infrastructures, optimizing for node availability and cross-organizational coordination. For validation, we conduct a case study using a Child Presence Detection System (CPDS), achieving full functional requirement coverage across all 9 requirements and 100% Gherkin generation accuracy on the controlled requirement set. Distributed test execution across geographically separated ECUs via Eclipse openDuT confirms the pipeline's applicability to OEM–supplier testing workflows.

Sequential agent search accumulates changes from its current champion but discards alternative branches; independent proposals preserve breadth but restart from the root. Loreley instead retains complete repository states in a Quality-Diversity (QD) archive and samples them as parents or supplies them as context for later edits. Candidates are Git commits produced in isolated worktrees and judged by a project-supplied evaluator. We compare configured Loreley QD, sequential champion editing, and independent root proposals in a matched Zstandard experiment: seven paired blocks and 48 physical candidate jobs per policy and block (1,008 total), with root-only initialization and each policy's native concurrency. Validation selected a winner at each budget checkpoint; an agent-hidden holdout measured the fixed candidate. At 48 jobs, QD was 0.135% below Sequential Champion (95% BCa interval for the paired effect: -0.556% to +0.161%) and 0.320% above Independent Root (-0.082% to +0.686%). Neither contrast established a QD advantage; Sequential had the highest observed 48-job mean and median. Archive retention and later sampling did occur. Four of seven final QD winners had a non-incumbent state in their primary-parent ancestry under a retrospective one-incumbent rule applied only to the observed QD stream. Including inspiration edges raised the count to six, without showing that supplied context caused an edit. Three earlier capability campaigns produced generation-4, multi-file improvements in two Python libraries and a separate Zstandard revision. Loreley engaged the intended stepping-stone mechanism, but the controlled experiment did not show an endpoint benefit at 48 jobs.

Computing has been an astonishing success - but the accumulated technical debt exposes us all to huge costs in business and societal risk. For 75 years, we've built systems to prose specifications with test-and-debug development. That works well enough for industry to thrive, but it's an expensive and ineffective feedback loop, and leaves everyone relying on shaky foundations. Now, AI-enabled engineering is amplifying the success by reducing coding costs, but also amplifies the risks, by rapidly increasing technical debt, and by automating detection of the vulnerabilities therein. How can we do better? Research has long pursued mathematical proof of correctness, which, unlike testing, can cover all cases. This too has advanced massively, but it remains hard to apply, both technically and because of a deep-seated cultural disconnect. Instead, we argue for a pragmatic approach to flexible combinations of testing, *specification*, and proof, that provides more effective feedback loops for both AI and human development. Most simply, one can incrementally co-develop executable-as-test-oracle partial specifications alongside conventional prose descriptions, code, and tests. This clarifies design and makes testing much more discriminating. Developers can and should do it today. Or, even better, one can use specifications that support the full gamut of testing, property-based testing, symbolic execution, and proof. This enables a range of intertwined feedback loops, again both for AI and humans, from cheap testing to more expensive proof. However, making it really practical needs *semantics infrastructure*: specifications and tooling for the main programming languages and other abstractions, which we now more-or-less know how to build, but which is not yet in place. We call the community to arms to create and deploy it - to enable a future built on firmer ground.

Execution feedback is often treated as a self-verifying signal for improving LLM-generated tests. However, when generated inputs are executed on a single accepted program and its outputs are used as ground truth, invalid or underspecified inputs can create spurious fault detections and apparent evolutionary gains. We audit this failure mode in feedback-driven test generation using 142 development tasks, 114 locked external tasks, and 138 held-out tasks, with two code models, three seeds, and fault-cross-fitted real submissions. On external inputs for which three accepted implementations agree, generated outputs match the panel on only 27.79% and 50.12% of cases. A single-reference oracle inflates the measured gain from evolution by 9.46-14.85 percentage points; after auditing, equal-budget independent resampling outperforms mutation-based evolution by 6.01-18.83 points. We further compare a genuine three-round feedback loop with a density-matched placebo. External Real-Placebo differences are +0.13 and -0.50 points, while held-out differences are +1.99 and +0.28 points and do not provide robust evidence of fine-grained feedback benefit. A blinded semantic audit by two software engineering doctoral students classifies 94.41% of panel-disconfirmed inputs as invalid but 3.60% as valid, showing that panel disagreement is informative but not semantic proof. We propose an audit-and-placebo protocol that separates verifier artifacts, interaction scaffolding, and grounded feedback credit in evaluations of self-evolving test generators.

Garbage-collector selection is a low-effort configuration decision that can influence both the performance and energy consumption of Java applications. However, it remains unclear whether aggregate energy rankings among collectors generalise across heterogeneous applications, workload intensities, and JDK distributions. This study presents a controlled empirical evaluation of Serial, Parallel, and G1 garbage collection across three Java applications, three workload intensities, and two JDK distributions: OpenJDK and Oracle JDK. Using EnergiBridge, processor-package energy consumption and execution time were measured and complementary energy-performance metrics derived. Across all evaluated configurations, Parallel recorded the lowest mean energy consumption (839.8 J), followed closely by Serial (857.6 J) and G1 (969.0 J), but an RCBD ANOVA did not establish a statistically reliable collector effect. Workload intensity, by contrast, was a significant driver of energy consumption, with heavy workloads consuming substantially more energy than light or medium workloads regardless of collector. Energy consumption showed a moderate positive association with execution time (r = 0.33), indicating that longer-running configurations tended toward higher energy use, though the relationship was far from proportional. No statistically significant energy difference was found between OpenJDK and Oracle JDK. Overall, the results do not support a universally energy-optimal garbage collector; instead, workload intensity emerges as the more reliable lever for managing Java energy consumption, and collector selection should be treated as an application-specific tuning decision supported by measurement on the target system rather than aggregate rankings alone.

VDM has been pursuing rigorous verification through mathematical theorem proving and software testing via simulated execution. Animation through an interpreter enables validation of the specification to ensure it meets the required functionality. Step-by-step execution in a debugger also allows the user to follow the internal behavior of operations. In this paper, we propose the recording and utilization of execution traces of assignments, operation calls, and return statements to make the internal behavior of operations persistent and analyzable as state-based models. The data model of events in execution traces, its implementation in ViennaTalk, and its application to visualization will be introduced.

Context compression is widely proposed as a way to cut the token bill of LLM coding agents, and public benchmarks report that aggressive compression preserves task-solving quality. These two facts do not imply the third one commonly assumed: that compressing file reads saves money in a real multi-turn agent. We instrument a production compression gateway (Paritok) between coding agents (Claude Code, Codex) and frontier LLMs (Claude Sonnet, GPT-5), and decompose the token bill of real sessions into three independent levers: tool-schema filtering, content compression of file reads and tool output, and history summarization. Measured in isolation under controlled A/B runs, the three save at fundamentally different rates. Tool-schema filtering removes a fixed block every turn, roughly 21K-57K tokens on a typical turn; it is linear in the turn count N and the only unambiguously and reproducibly positive lever. Content compression saves only about 2% of the cache-priced prefix per turn, but compressed reads accumulate in history and are re-sent on every later turn, so its cumulative saving grows quadratically, about 3350*N^2 tokens (measured), overtaking the fixed tool-filter saving within roughly 6 turns until the context window caps it. A non-destructive gateway lets the agent pull original bytes back on demand; each recall re-sends exactly the one segment just compressed away, so its cost is fixed and bounded rather than a multiplicative blowup, and heavy recall spends the accumulated saving back one segment at a time. Finally, a strong single-shot compression benchmark - 86.5% of SWE-bench quality retained at a 25.7% compression rate, achieved by the model this gateway deploys (Paritok-4B, reported separately) - is orthogonal to multi-turn agent cost and must not be cited as a cost-saving argument. We distill the results into an actionable recipe for where token-saving effort pays off.

Complying with the EU Cyber Resilience Act (CRA) is a resource-intensive challenge for SMEs due to the complexity of cybersecurity conformity assessment. Yet, it is essential for demonstrating regulatory compliance and ensuring product security and resilience. To address this, we introduce an automated framework for generating Assurance Cases (ACs) using an agentic Retrieval-Augmented Generation grounded in a formal Claim-Argument-Evidence logic. By systematically mapping technical documentation requirements, the framework streamlines the generation of certification evidence. We validate our approach on a case study of Catalink's PATROLIoT wildfire monitoring system, where the agentic RAG generated 70 ACs with high grounding density (~4.4 artefacts per AC). The proposed Natural Language Inference (NLI) evaluator achieves 0.88 accuracy, which provides robust evidence grounding and traceability, while expert-validated plausibility (3.06) supports interpretable justifications. For practitioners, this work provides a scalable, interpretable approach for automating mandatory CRA conformity assessments, reducing manual effort while maintaining transparent decision support.

Python is widely used in scientific research because it enables rapid development and provides rich ecosystems for data analysis, artificial intelligence (AI), and machine learning. However, customized research code can become prohibitively slow as experiments scale. This challenge is particularly acute in discrete-event project-scheduling simulations, where sequential state updates, nested loops, conditional evaluations, and object-oriented structures limit the benefits of compiled numerical and GPU-accelerated libraries. Addressing these bottlenecks typically requires iterative profiling, refactoring, testing, and validation, yet researchers may lack the time or specialized software-engineering expertise for low-level optimization. This paper presents a systematic refactoring approach using Claude agentic AI on real-world project-scheduling workloads in a high-performance computing (HPC) environment. Guided by representative benchmarks and correctness checks, the agent identifies bottlenecks, implements targeted optimizations, and evaluates their effects, while the researcher retains final control. Testing runtime reduced from 1,298 seconds to under 200 seconds without changing outputs, saving four million core-hours (NZ\$320,000) annually.

This work introduces a formal semantic-block model for specifications and an execution-judged benchmark for evaluating specification quality independently of model capability. A specification is represented as a structure comprising semantic blocks, dependency relations, block-owned rules, decision points, and explicitly open questions, subject to four machine-checkable well-formedness conditions: acyclicity, single ownership, constraint domination, and totality or ambiguity-stop. Determinacy is defined model-theoretically as agreement among all conforming implementations and is estimated empirically through convergence across independent implementers. The model is instantiated on an Oracle-to-PostgreSQL migration specification containing 18 blocks and 19 dependency edges. Computational validation shows that the five-layer decomposition reduces mean per-task context by approximately 71% through dependency closures, covers 85.5% of the study-defined Oracle construct taxonomy with all identified gaps triaged, is not Pareto-dominated by the tested alternative partitions, and is recovered at the 99.9th percentile from citation-derived edges not used to define the original structure. The benchmark keeps the implementer panel fixed, includes a mandatory no-specification control arm, and uses PostgreSQL 16 and a live Oracle instance as deterministic execution judges. Six designed studies, including three pre-registered manipulations and three diagnostic analyses, further examine specification effects. Repeated runs on a 25-unit subsample reveal an empirical variability floor with a median arm-delta spread of 14.4 percentage points. The results support determinacy as a formal concept but not as a standalone empirical quality metric for the evaluated contemporary LLM implementers.

Real-time systems have various requirements such as the deadline and resource constraints. In addition, real-time systems are becoming larger and more complex, and studies on performance analysis and efficient scheduling algorithms are becoming increasingly important. Directed acyclic graph (DAG) models, which can express task dependencies and parallelism, are used for such studies. Random DAG sets are used to demonstrate the effectiveness and objectivity of methods proposed for real-time systems. However, there is no random DAG generation tool available that can generate a DAG set that considers the latest multi-rate applications. Therefore, researchers need to generate random DAG sets on their own, leading to additional effort and reduced reliability and reproducibility. To solve this problem, we propose a random DAG generator considering multi-rate applications for reproducible scheduling evaluation (RD-Gen). RD-Gen also enables batch generation of random DAG sets with different parameters. Case studies are used to demonstrate that RD-Gen can manage various problem settings and DAG study requirements.

Search-based Automated Program Repair (APR) techniques rely on carefully designed mutation operators to explore the space of candidate fixes. Recent advances in Large Language Models (LLMs) suggest that generative models could replace such operators by dynamically proposing repairs. In this paper, we investigate this hypothesis in the context of Cyber-Physical Systems (CPSs) modeled in Simulink/Stateflow. We extend the state-of-the-art FlowRepair approach by replacing a subset of its mutation operators with LLM-generated mutations, enabling more flexible and expressive patch generation. We evaluate the approach on a benchmark of 19 real-world faulty Stateflow models across four CPS domains, using the same experimental setup as FlowRepair for controlled comparison under the same wall-clock budget. Contrary to expectations, in this controlled evaluation, the LLM-based mutation substantially degrades repair performance under the FlowRepair experimental setup. Across the tested LLM variants, the LLM-based repair produced plausible patches for 4-6 models and valid patches for 4 models, compared to 18 and 16, respectively, with the original approach. Our analysis reveals that, in this integration, LLMs struggle with precise symbolic edits, lack behavioral feedback, and generate a noisy search space that hinders effective exploration. Rather than showing a general limitation of LLMs for APR, these findings highlight fundamental limitations of naively integrating LLMs into search-based APR and motivate hybrid approaches that combine structured mutation with generative guidance.