The remarkable progress of Large Language Models (LLMs) presents promising opportunities for Verilog code generation which is significantly important for automated circuit design. The lacking of meaningful functional rewards hinders the preference optimization based on Reinforcement Learning (RL) for producing functionally correct Verilog code. In this paper, we propose Signal-Aware Learning for Verilog code generation (QiMeng-SALV) by leveraging code segments of functionally correct output signal to optimize RL training. Considering Verilog code specifies the structural interconnection of hardware gates and wires so that different output signals are independent, the key insight of QiMeng-SALV is to extract verified signal-aware implementations in partially incorrect modules, so as to enhance the extraction of meaningful functional rewards. Roughly, we verify the functional correctness of signals in generated module by comparing with that of reference module in the training data. Then abstract syntax tree (AST) is employed to identify signal-aware code segments which can provide meaningful functional rewards from erroneous modules. Finally, we introduce signal-aware DPO which is optimized on the correct signal-level code segments, thereby preventing noise and interference from incorrect signals. The proposed QiMeng-SALV underscores the paradigm shift from conventional module-level to fine-grained signal-level optimization in Verilog code generation, addressing the issue of insufficient functional rewards. Experiments demonstrate that our method achieves state-of-the-art performance on VerilogEval and RTLLM, with a 7B parameter model matching the performance of the DeepSeek v3 671B model and significantly outperforming the leading open-source model CodeV trained on the same dataset.

LRMs we By inno training directly vatively LRMs on fine-tune the to origina accurately the l reasoning model verify solely task the correctness the o reasoning verthinking.

Programming assistants powered by large language models have improved dramatically, yet existing benchmarks still evaluate them in narrow code-generation settings. Recent efforts such as InfiBench and StackEval rely on Stack Overflow questions and remain limited to single-turn interactions, manually curated data, and isolated snippets rather than full project environments. We introduce CodeAssistBench (CAB), the first benchmark for evaluating multi-turn, project-grounded programming assistance at scale. CAB automatically constructs datasets from GitHub issues tagged as questions, using an LLM-driven pipeline that filters noise, extracts runnable contexts, builds executable containers, and verifies environment correctness. This enables continuous, automated expansion across diverse repositories without manual intervention. Using CAB, we create a testbed of 3,286 real-world issues across 214 repositories, spanning seven languages. Evaluating state-of-theart models reveals a substantial gap: while models achieve 70-83% accuracy on Stack Overflow-style questions, they solve only 7.22-16.49% of CAB issues from post-training-cutoff repositories. These results highlight a fundamental challenge: current LLMs struggle to provide assistance in realistic, project-specific contexts despite strong performance on traditional Q&A benchmarks. CAB provides a scalable, reproducible framework for advancing research in multi-turn, codebasegrounded programming agents.

We introduce CLEVER1, a high-quality, curated benchmark of 161 problems for end-to-end verified code generation in Lean. Each problem consists of (1) the task of generating a specification that matches a held-out ground-truth specification, and (2) the task of generating a Lean implementation that provably satisfies this specification. Unlike prior benchmarks, CLEVER avoids test-case supervision, LLM-generated annotations, and specifications that leak implementation logic or allow vacuous solutions. All outputs are verified post-hoc using Lean's type checker to ensure machine-checkable correctness. We use CLEVER to evaluate several few-shot and agentic approaches based on state-of-the-art language models. These methods all struggle to achieve full verification, establishing it as a challenging frontier benchmark for program synthesis and formal reasoning. Our benchmark can be found on GitHub as well as HuggingFace. All our evaluation code is also available online.

Given a Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) describing a target system, SpecMAS parses the specification, identifies relevant operational modes, variables, transitions, and properties, and generates a formal model in NuSMV code syntax, an industry-standard symbolic model checker. A dedicated reasoning agent extracts both explicit and implicit properties from the SOP, and verification is performed via temporal logic model checking. If any properties fail to verify, an autonomous debugging agent analyzes counterexamples and iteratively corrects the model until all properties are satisfied. This closed-loop system design guarantees provable correctness by construction and advances the state of the art in automated, interpretable, and deployable verification pipelines. We demonstrate the generality, correctness, and practical feasibility of SpecMAS across a set of representative case studies and propose a new benchmark dataset for the evaluation and comparison of model checking performance.

Advancing code reasoning in large language models (LLMs) is fundamentally limited by the scarcity of high-difficulty datasets, especially those with verifiable input-output test cases necessary for rigorous solution validation at scale. We introduce rStar-Coder, which significantly improves LLM code reasoning capabilities by constructing a large-scale, verified dataset of 418K competitionlevel code problems, 580K long-reasoning solutions along with rich test cases of varying difficulty. This is achieved through three core contributions: (1) we curate competitive programming code problems and solutions to synthesize new, solvable problems; (2) we introduce a reliable input-output test case synthesis pipeline that decouples the generation into a three-step input generation method and a mutual verification mechanism for effective output labeling; (3) we augment problems with high-quality, test-case-verified long-reasoning solutions. Extensive experiments on Qwen models (1.5B-14B) across various code reasoning benchmarks demonstrate the superiority of rStar-Coder dataset, achieving leading performance comparable to frontier reasoning LLMs with significantly smaller model sizes.

Process reward models (PRMs) offer fine-grained, step-level evaluations that facilitate deeper reasoning processes in large language models (LLMs), proving effective in complex tasks like mathematical reasoning. However, developing PRMs is challenging due to the high cost and limited scalability of human-annotated data. Synthetic data from Monte Carlo (MC) estimation is a promising alternative but suffers from a high noise ratio, which can cause overfitting and hinder large-scale training. In this work, we conduct a preliminary study on the noise distribution in synthetic data from MC estimation, identifying that annotation models tend to both underestimate and overestimate step correctness due to limitations in their annotation capabilities. Building on these insights, we propose Self-Denoising Monte Carlo Annotation (SCAN), an efficient data synthesis and noise-tolerant learning framework. Our key findings indicate that: (1) Even lightweight models (e.g., 1.5B parameters) can produce high-quality annotations through a self-denoising strategy, enabling PRMs to achieve superior performance with only 6% the inference cost required by vanilla MC estimation.

Large Language Models (LLMs) are increasingly deployed in high-stakes domains such as science, law, and healthcare, where accurate expressions of uncertainty are essential for reliability and trust. However, current LLMs are often observed to generate incorrect answers with high confidence--a phenomenon known as "overconfidence". Recent efforts have focused on calibrating LLMs' verbalized confidence: i.e., their expressions of confidence in text form, such as "I am 80% confident that...". Existing approaches either rely on prompt engineering or fine-tuning with heuristically generated uncertainty estimates, both of which have limited effectiveness and generalizability. Motivated by the notion of proper scoring rules for calibration in classical machine learning models, we introduce ConfTuner, a simple and efficient fine-tuning method that introduces minimal overhead and does not require ground-truth confidence scores or proxy confidence estimates. ConfTuner relies on a new loss function, tokenized Brier score, which we theoretically prove to be a proper scoring rule, intuitively meaning that it "correctly incentivizes the model to report its true probability of being correct". ConfTuner improves calibration across diverse reasoning tasks and generalizes to black-box models such as GPT-4o. Our results further show that better-calibrated confidence enables downstream gains in self-correction and model cascade, advancing the development of trustworthy LLM systems.

Large Language Models exhibit logical inconsistency across multi-turn inference processes, undermining correctness in complex inferential tasks. Challenges arise from ensuring that outputs align with both factual correctness and human intent.

Modern code generation has made significant strides in functional correctness and execution efficiency. However, these systems often overlook a critical dimension in real-world software development: maintainability. To handle dynamic requirements with minimal rework, we propose MaintainCoder as a pioneering solution. It integrates the Waterfall model, design patterns, and multi-agent collaboration to systematically enhance cohesion, reduce coupling, achieving clear responsibility boundaries and better maintainability. We also introduce MaintainBench, a benchmark comprising requirement changes and novel dynamic metrics on maintenance efforts. Experiments demonstrate that existing code generation methods struggle to meet maintainability standards when requirements evolve. In contrast, MaintainCoder improves dynamic maintainability metrics by more than 60% with even higher correctness of initial codes. Furthermore, while static metrics fail to accurately reflect maintainability and even contradict each other, our proposed dynamic metrics exhibit high consistency. Our work not only provides the foundation for maintainable code generation, but also highlights the need for more realistic and comprehensive code generation research.