ALT Institutions that deploy large language models in regulated settings often need technical evidence of responsible AI practices before approving a deployment. COMPL-AI provides a technical interpretation of the EU AI Act that organises this evidence under six principle groups and eighteen technical requirements, twelve of which current benchmarks can measure. The benchmark suites that produce this evidence are typically operated from a command line, while the staff who approve deployments are non-engineers. We present VERA, an open-source self-hosted dashboard deployed to facilitate responsible AI processes within a large European bank. A reviewer selects a model and runs public benchmarks against it. VERA scores the twelve requirements that current benchmarks can measure and instruments the energy consumed by each evaluation, adding run-level evidence for environmental impact. We run four served open-weight models through the requirement pipeline, and the dashboard displays a score for

ALT Commit messages help developers understand code changes and support software maintenance. Recent approaches use repository context to improve commit message generation (CMG) with large language models (LLMs). However, existing CMG methods provide limited support for understanding how local edits affect functionality jointly implemented by multiple code entities. This functional understanding is essential for generating commit messages that explain the main change and its impact. To address this problem, we propose CAMGen, a core change-aware multi-view commit message generation framework that incorporates functional context into generation. CAMGen identifies core entities that represent the primary change intent. It then forms candidate functional units through repository-wide semantic clustering and uses those containing the core entities to construct a Functional Semantic View. This view supplies semantic context for interpreting the affected functionality. CAMGen also uses context p

ALT Procrustes-Bering-Sheaft automates lightweight model discovery and virtual crash tests for microservices. Each test estimates operation availability by Monte Carlo sampling of service and communication failures. Procrustes checks deployment and tracing evidence; Bering discovers dependencies and incorporates replica declarations; Sheaft evaluates declared operation-success conditions. Independent command-line interfaces exchange reusable, versioned artifacts. The toolchain extends an earlier graph-based approach with mandatory-call contracts, failure-tolerance sweeps, baseline comparison, component-importance analysis, and CI/CD gates. We demonstrate the workflow on one HTTP operation. Six controlled execution states exposed two mismatches between reachability and observed success; an explicit required-call predicate matched all six. Two modelled one-replica additions produced different decisions: recommendation retained an availability-target violation, whereas catalog restored the ba

ALT Feature flags are runtime configuration mechanisms used for gradual feature rollouts, experimentation, and kill switches. Once a feature is fully rolled out, the flag and its gated code become technical debt and can introduce operational risk through inadvertently enabling dormant code paths. At DoorDash, over 56,000 feature flags span 623 repositories, with 1,659 currently stale as of May 2026, with internal estimates of one to two hours per manual cleanup. Existing rule-based cleanup tools proved insufficient in DoorDash's codebases. Our contribution is an end-to-end automated LLM-based feature flag cleanup system that integrates querying live feature flag rollout data using MCP, Jira ticket processing, and end-to-end pull request creation. Our system successfully produced engineer-approved flag removal PRs for 45 (90%) of the 50 stale flags it was evaluated on, proving the system's operational viability at scale with each cleanup averaging only 4.79 and 13.8 minutes. We evaluated th

ALT Fuzzing software with complex inputs has been a longstanding challenge. Traditionally, fuzzers either programmatically encode language constraints, requiring significant engineering effort, or rely on users to declare grammars and constraints. Recent LLM-based fuzzers address these drawbacks but introduce new issues. Some use LLMs for test generation, sacrificing throughput and producing invalid inputs when the LLM makes mistakes. Others rely on language-specific parsers, static analysis, and AST manipulation libraries. We introduce Typed Template Fuzzing (TTF), a lightweight LLM-based fuzzing methodology. The key idea is to use LLMs in a preprocessing step to transform seeds into typed templates. The typed templates then enable semantically aware, mutation-based fuzzing without language-specific parsers, type checkers, or further LLM queries during fuzzing. By exploiting the correspondence between seeds and templates, TTF can moreover repair LLM mistakes. We have implemented TTF in ou

ALT Software agents are being trained to exceed human engineers; we argue that capability alone does not produce better software engineering. We define superintelligent software engineering as the discipline of building and evolving software with agents whose capability exceeds that of human engineers, in which governance (gates, contracts, decisions and decay control) scales with capability. The argument rests on three claims. First, correctness in a project rests on decisions and contracts that the code does not carry. Second, knowledge decays. Third, once an agent outpaces its reviewers, reading catches a shrinking share of the changes built on stale knowledge. A simple model shows that, past a fixed review capacity, escaping changes grow linearly with throughput while the share that reading catches falls toward zero; governance can lower the slope, capability alone cannot. An exploratory snapshot of 452 of the most-starred public GitHub repositories finds a root-level or.github agent c

ALT Multi-agent LLM pipelines are often credited with gains in software engineering tasks, but it is rarely clear whether a gain stems from the typed contract between agents or from the specialized prompts that decomposition enables. We study this attribution problem in Requirements Engineering, comparing three architectures for classifying requirements as functional or non-functional and then prioritizing them with MoSCoW: a single-call baseline; a two-call variant that reuses the pipeline's specialized prompts but passes an unvalidated intermediate; and a pipeline with a Pydantic-validated typed state. The 18 conditions cover PROMISE NFR+ (625 requirements), three locally hosted small language models, and two languages. The F1 gain over the baseline is associated with the two-call, specialized-prompt variant (up to +0.075), whereas the typed state adds a small difference (-0.003 to +0.013) that is significant in one of six comparisons. Beyond accuracy, the typed pipeline contains out-of-

ALT Frontend coding agents are usually graded on one question: did the requested target get built. Real engineering changes carry a second obligation, because the rest of the site has to keep working. We call that second obligation website continuity, and introduce ProductWebBench, a benchmark that scores both on living frontend repositories: 320 Change tasks over existing code and 80 long-horizon Build tasks. Every task freezes a repository snapshot, staged requirements, browser evidence and deterministic checks before evaluation, and enters only once a reference passes every check and plausible-wrong ones fail. A simulated user reveals the requirements one stage at a time, and every check cleared earlier stays armed for the rest of the run. Across 8,737 runs from 13 models the two come apart: of the Change runs passing every requested-work check, 28.2% still fail a continuity check – a blank route, horizontal overflow, console errors – and 10.8% push a browser state they had already pass

ALT Large Language Models (LLMs) can generate UML class diagrams from natural language requirements, but hallucinations may compromise the correctness and completeness of the resulting diagrams. Existing evaluations mostly assess the final diagram, without examining the intermediate traces of reasoning-capable LLMs, which can reveal where these hallucinations arise. We develop an empirical taxonomy of eleven hallucination sub-types organised into three dimensions: Prompt Faithfulness (deviations between requirements and reasoning), Code Faithfulness (discrepancies between reasoning and generated PlantUML code), and Reasoning Quality (problems within the reasoning). The taxonomy was derived from 60 manually annotated DeepSeek-R1 traces, applied to 120 further DeepSeek-R1 traces through a dual-LLM annotation pipeline, and examined on 20 DeepSeek-V4-Pro traces. Code Faithfulness was the most frequent dimension for DeepSeek-R1 in both datasets, whereas Prompt Faithfulness dominated for DeepSee

ALT Enterprise AI-agent evaluation needs evidence about whether test suites expose specified faults and whether their reference rules are trustworthy. We introduce REGATTA (Regulatory Evaluation of Agents via Two-stage Testing and Assurance), a measurement framework with three instruments. A 125-item source-cited checklist spans five industry-by-jurisdiction cells across the United States and Vietnam. A 25-fault corpus covers five categories, and a harness scores suite-level fault detection at the design and execution stages. We examine four measurement diagnostics on 180 generated suites (5,400 scenarios) from three LLM generators. A source audit finds 24 items misstating the rule in force, 46 additional citation defects, 31 items with only non-binding, unidentifiable, or unverifiable sources, and 24 verified clean. Only initially substance-flagged items received author review; all 24 clean rows received AI review only. Results therefore describe the instruments as written, not legal comp

ALT Coding assistants are widely reported to speed up code production; most accounts stop there. We report the end-to-end construction and deployment of a compliance-critical, human-in-the-loop exam-grading system, built by a single developer who wrote no code by hand, protected by a gated process from stakeholder persona to audited behavior. The initial system was built in three working days and could grade a real cohort. We draw one claim from this experience: AI changes software engineering less by making programming faster than by changing what is scarce. Writing code becomes abundant. Reliable evaluation-knowing whether a result is correct and meets the actual need-remains necessary at every iteration and becomes the binding constraint. Engineering judgment remains a second scarcity. Several defects passed the test suite: they sat at the boundaries the tests had mocked, the browser and the language-model API, or appeared only in real use. Deployment exposed assumptions that local test

ALT Lifting stripped, heavily optimized binaries to a canonical, pre-optimization LLVM intermediate representation (IR) is essential for downstream security analysis and legacy software migration when source code is unavailable. However, aggressive compiler optimizations rewrite control and data flow, remove structural metadata, and introduce type-erased low-level idioms, causing current lifters to produce malformed or semantically divergent IR. We present ATLAS, a multi-agent framework designed to reconstruct formally valid and canonical LLVM IR from optimized disassembly.ATLAS combines (i) Structure-aware, region-level retrieval, which utilizes pseudo-probe attribution to align optimized instructions with canonical IR exemplars, and (ii) a collaborative refinement loop that closes the gap between probabilistic generation and deterministic compiler constraints. Concretely, a Lift agent generates an initial IR draft conditioned on retrieved exemplars, an Advisor agent interprets LLVM verif

ALT Agents that call tools from a shared catalog can pool what they learn about which tool serves which request. We measure what pooled usage examples do to tool retrieval, reporting separately the held-out tools, for which no agent has usage, and all other tools. Adding usage examples to the index as extra entries for used tools raises Hit@5 (whether a gold tool is in the top five) for those tools and lowers it for held-out tools, by a large margin on two of three catalogs and with both embedders we tested. Giving used tools the same number of equally long entries filled with other tools' text lowers held-out Hit@5 about as much, but gives little or none of the gain. We call our method of scoring usage as its own field SYNAPSE. On StableToolBench, the held-out gold tool appears in its top five more often than with a router that reserves slots for usage (0.785 against 0.683), and this held-out lead holds on all three catalogs with both embedders. This protection persisted when we replaced

ALT The Ethereum community learns where developers struggle through surveys and interviews, which record what developers say when asked about a chosen theme. Ethereum Stack Exchange (ESE) records what they ask for unprompted, and whether anyone resolves it. We study every question posted to ESE from Jan 2016 to Dec 2025, 54,637 in all, and label each with a prompt-based topic pipeline seeded with eight Ethereum-specific topics and open to new ones (22 topics in all). A three-provider committee of language models screens the labels, and manual adjudication of every disputed case puts their accuracy at 87.9 to 93.5%. Because the corpus is the complete record, no rate carries sampling error. We ask what developers ask for help with, whether the venue still resolves it, and, where it does not, whether the questions changed or their resolution did. Demand is concentrated on writing, deploying, and debugging contracts; the toolchain is the second-largest topic and growing, while security, consen

ALT Vision-language models (VLMs) are increasingly embedded in software systems. Testing them raises two problems. Mutating either input can change the expected answer, so an output change is not by itself a failure. Some failures appear only when both inputs are mutated; attributing them to the combination requires testing each mutation alone. We present VLTest, a black-box VLM testing approach. It generates image variants by editing VQGAN latent codes and text variants with a rewrite-expand-prune pipeline, filters variants likely to change the expected answer, and tests each variant alone before testing combinations, so every joint failure has four matched cells. A VLM judge confirms a failure only after checking that the input keeps the expected answer. On three tasks with eight VLMs, including two commercial API models, the oracle confirms 81.7% of the candidates, with 88.8% to 94.6% precision against human labels, and four-cell confirmation rejects 22.5% of joint candidates. Under the

ALT AI-assisted code generation amplifies the demand for automated formal verification. Generated programs must not only be executable but also accompanied by machine-checkable evidence of correctness. Existing approaches can synthesize functionally plausible code or plausible-looking specifications from natural-language prompts; however, they do not explicitly co-design the implementation and specification as a unified artifact optimized for verification. Consequently, automated verifiers often fail to discharge proof obligations. Typical failure modes include missing or implicit proof anchors, program structures that are hostile to automated reasoning, and inconsistencies between code-level state and specification-level requirement facts arising from the independent generation of code and specifications. Even when verification succeeds, it may only establish weak specifications that omit requirement-critical behavior. This paper introduces VeriGen-C, a formal-verification-friendly framew

ALT Between 2023 and 2026, AI changed how software is priced. Traditional SaaS charged per seat because serving one more user cost almost nothing. Model inference has non-zero marginal cost, and usage varies by orders of magnitude across customers, producing prepaid credits, metered usage, hybrid seat-plus-usage models, and outcome pricing that supplement, and in rare cases replace, seat-based pricing. These pricing models have not been systematically characterized. This paper presents a reproducible study of public pricing artifacts - pricing pages and documentation - across three cohorts: the full Forbes AI 50 (2026) as the AI-native core sample, cloud platforms selling AI services included by a documented rule, and a frozen purposive cohort of 9 distinctive designs. It contributes (1) a dataset coding each offering's pricing primitive and credit mechanics with dated primary sources, prepared for public release with the paper, (2) a taxonomy of the primitives in use and their distributio

ALT Purpose: Coding agents follow a project's instruction file, such as CLAUDE.md or AGENTS.md, even when it disagrees with the existing code and even when they notice the disagreement. We measure this behaviour and test whether one sentence in the user's own instruction file makes agents follow the code instead. Methods: We built 40 Python projects in which the instruction file asks for one convention while the existing code uses another, for example print instead of logging. Claude Code and Codex CLI added a feature to each project, with and without a sentence in the user-level instruction file that gives the existing code precedence, in 320 runs. Results: Without the sentence, 90.1% of the agents' choices followed the stale file. Claude Code pointed out the conflict in 79 of 80 runs and still followed the file. Codex CLI rewrote the existing code to match the file in 20 of 80 runs, and the project's own tests then failed in 17 of them. The sentence raised the share of choices that follo

ALT Recent reports, such as "Who is using AI to code?", indicate that approximately 30\% of Python code contributions to GitHub are AI-generated. Given the inherent unreliability of this code, formal verification emerges as a promising approach to establish trust in software correctness. Although leveraging large language models (LLMs) for formal verification has garnered increasing attention, practical adoption remains limited due to the challenges in writing formal specifications and verifying program correctness against them. Existing tools predominantly support verification for languages such as Java and C, with minimal support for Python. We present TrustedCode, an automated framework for verifying AI-generated Python code. TrustedCode uses LLMs to (i) type-check Python code, (ii) translate it into WhyML via the Why3 framework, and (iii) verify it against formal specifications using Why3 back-end automated theorem provers. Our method integrates chain-of-thought prompting through LangG

ALT AI coding agents could change whether organizations buy software or build the functionality they need. We focus on organizations and professional buyers whose domain knowledge can help them specify and evaluate tools for their work. We define the software substitution frontier as the functions customers could build and maintain at an acceptable standard for less than buying them. Using public data, we compare growing capacity to build with indicators of market change. Since 2023, the length of benchmark tasks that leading agents can complete at 50 percent success, measured in human working time, has doubled about every 129 days. A broad search identified 575 potential open-source alternatives to selected commercial products, although some functional matches still require independent validation. The Craft suite produced 12 application repositories over 12.0 days of public development, but these remain early versions with unverified completeness and reliability. Market evidence is mixed: