How Stable Are LLM-Generated Proofs Under Program Refactoring? A Stress Test for Verifiable Code Generation
arXiv:2610.36328v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Benchmarks for verifiable code generation usually test a proof against one fixed implementation. We ask whether the same proof remains valid after a program refactoring that preserves behavior. We introduce RefactorProof, which derives 458 Lean-certified variants from the 185 VERINA tasks that compile in our pinned environment while holding the specification and evaluated proof fixed byte-for-byte. VERINA supplies reference proofs for 46 tasks, all
阅读原始来源
来源记录
研究分析
研究主张
论文标识：2610.36328。 来源描述：arXiv:2610.36328v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Benchmarks for verifiable code generation usually test a proof against one fixed implementation. We ask whether the same proof remains valid after a program refactoring that preserves behavior. We introduce RefactorProof, which derives 458 Lean-certified variants from the 185 VERINA tasks that compile in our pinned environment while holding the specification and evaluated proof fixed byte-for-byte. VERINA supplies reference proofs for 46 tasks, all
评测与比较记录
可供比较的近期同类记录：“CCDWIKI: Decoupling Case Formulation from Response Generation in Longitudinal CBT Dialogue” (arXiv, 2026年11月5日)；“AI-Driven SaaS Platform Integration: AI Express for Unified Generative AI Services with Pay-As-You-Go Credit Systems and Scalable Microservice Archite” (arXiv, 2026年11月5日)。主题相近仅用于导航，未核验其是否属于同一需求或独立证据。
结论适用范围
结论只能在所述模型版本、任务、数据与推理预算内解释。社区票数、下载量或榜单位置不能证明另一工作流中的可靠性。
有效性与复现缺口
需核对样本选择、基线配置、不确定性、数据污染风险、负面结果以及代码或权重可获取性；此处没有本站复现实验记录。
复核路线
阅读论文或模型卡及评测附录，针对明确基线复现一个有限结论，再测试代表性用户任务并记录结论失效的场景。