Program synthesis aims to automatically generate an executable program that conforms to the given specification. Recent advancements have demonstrated that deep neural methodologies and large-scale pretrained language models are highly proficient in capturing program semantics. For robot programming, prior works have facilitated program synthesis by incorporating global environments. However, the assumption of acquiring a comprehensive understanding of the entire environment is often excessively challenging to achieve.

Despite recent advances in LLMs, the task of code generation is still challenging. To cope, code selection algorithms select the best program from multiple programs generated by an LLM. However, existing algorithms can fail to identify the correct program, either because they fail to distinguish nonequivalent programs or because they rely on an LLM and assume it always correctly determines the output for every input. We present ExPairT-LLM, an exact learning algorithm for code selection that selects a program by posing two new types of queries to an LLM oracle: pairwise membership and pairwise equivalence. These queries are simpler for LLMs and enable ExPairT-LLM to identify the correct program through a tournament, which is robust to some LLM mistakes. We evaluate ExPairT-LLM on four popular code datasets. Its pass@1 (success rate) outperforms the state-of-the-art code selection algorithm on average by +13.0% and up to +27.1%. It also improves the pass@1 of LLMs performing complex reasoning by +24.0%.

JavaScript obfuscators are widely deployed to protect intellectual property and resist reverse engineering, yet their correctness has been largely overlooked compared to performance and resilience. Existing evaluations typically measure resistance to deobfuscation, leaving the critical question of whether obfuscators preserve program semantics unanswered. Incorrect transformations can silently alter functionality, compromise reliability, and erode security-undermining the very purpose of obfuscation. To address this gap, we present OBsmith, a novel framework to systematically test JavaScript obfuscators using large language models (LLMs). OBsmith leverages LLMs to generate program sketches abstract templates capturing diverse language constructs, idioms, and corner cases-which are instantiated into executable programs and subjected to obfuscation under different configurations. Besides LLM-powered sketching, OBsmith also employs a second source: automatic extraction of sketches from real programs. This extraction path enables more focused testing of project specific features and lets developers inject domain knowledge into the resulting test cases. OBsmith uncovers 11 previously unknown correctness bugs. Under an equal program budget, five general purpose state-of-the-art JavaScript fuzzers (FuzzJIT, Jsfunfuzz, Superion, DIE, Fuzzilli) failed to detect these issues, highlighting OBsmith's complementary focus on obfuscation induced misbehavior. An ablation shows that all components except our generic MRs contribute to at least one bug class; the negative MR result suggests the need for obfuscator-specific metamorphic relations. Our results also seed discussion on how to balance obfuscation presets and performance cost. We envision OBsmith as an important step towards automated testing and quality assurance of obfuscators and other semantic-preserving toolchains.

We can also get 1.3 better pass rate over the ChatGPT Code

Inductive reasoning enables humans to infer abstract rules from limited examples and apply them to novel situations. In this work, we compare an LLM-based hypothesis search framework with direct program generation approaches on few-shot rule induction tasks. Our findings show that hypothesis search achieves performance comparable to humans, while direct program generation falls notably behind. An error analysis reveals key bottlenecks in hypothesis generation and suggests directions for advancing program induction methods. Overall, this paper underscores the potential of LLM-based hypothesis search for modeling inductive reasoning and the challenges in building more efficient systems.

Large Language Models (LLMs) with reasoning are trained to iteratively generate and refine their answers before finalizing them, which can help with applications to mathematics and code generation. We apply code generation with reasoning LLMs to a specific task in the mathematical field of combinatorial design. This field studies diverse types of combinatorial designs, many of which have lists of open instances for which existence has not yet been determined. The Constructive Protocol CPro1 uses LLMs to generate search heuristics that have the potential to construct solutions to small open instances. Starting with a textual definition and a validity verifier for a particular type of design, CPro1 guides LLMs to select and implement strategies, while providing automated hyperparameter tuning and execution feedback. CPro1 with reasoning LLMs successfully solves long-standing open instances for 7 of 16 combinatorial design problems selected from the 2006 Handbook of Combinatorial Designs, including new solved instances for 3 of these (Bhaskar Rao Designs, Symmetric Weighing Matrices, Balanced Ternary Designs) that were unsolved by CPro1 with non-reasoning LLMs. It also solves open instances for several problems from recent (2025) literature, generating new Covering Sequences, Johnson Clique Covers, Deletion Codes, and a Uniform Nested Steiner Quadruple System.

Verifiers play a crucial role in large language model (LLM) reasoning, needed by post-training techniques such as reinforcement learning. However, reliable verifiers are hard to get for difficult coding problems, because a well-disguised wrong solution may only be detected by carefully human-written edge cases that are difficult to synthesize. To address this issue, we propose HARDTESTGEN, a pipeline for high-quality test synthesis using LLMs. With this pipeline, we curate a comprehensive competitive programming dataset HARDTESTS with 47k problems and synthetic high-quality tests. Compared with existing tests, HARDTESTGEN tests demonstrate precision that is 11.3 percentage points higher and recall that is 17.5 percentage points higher when evaluating LLM-generated code. For harder problems, the improvement in precision can be as large as 40 points. HARDTESTS also proves to be more effective for model training, measured by downstream code generation performance. We will open-source our dataset and synthesis pipeline at https://leililab.github.io/HardTests/.