Translating C to memory-safe languages, like Rust, prevents critical memory safety vulnerabilities that are prevalent in legacy C software. Existing approaches for C to safe Rust translation, including LLM-assisted ones, do not generalize on larger (> 500 LoC) C codebases because they depend on complex program analyses that frequently break. In this work, we present ACToR (Adversarial C To Rust translator), a simple LLM agent-based approach. Inspired by GANs, ACToR pits a generator agent against a discriminator agent, which collaborate to iteratively generate a Rust translation. On each iteration, the translator agent synthesizes and refines a Rust translation to pass an existing suite of tests, and then the discriminator agent finds new failing tests. We demonstrate that ACToR translates all of the 63 real-world command-line utilities considered in our benchmarks, which have an average size of 473 lines of code, and it achieves over 90% test pass rate with zero human intervention during translation. To our knowledge, it is the first work to show evidence that an agent-centric approach can reliably and automatically convert standalone command-line C programs at this scale. Furthermore, ACToR improves translation correctness by up to 25.1% compared to baseline, non-adversarial approaches.

Large Language Models (LLMs) have demonstrated remarkable potential in hardware front-end design using hardware description languages (HDLs). However, their inherent tendency toward hallucination often introduces functional errors into the generated HDL designs. To address this issue, we propose the framework CorrectHDL that leverages high-level synthesis (HLS) results as functional references to correct potential errors in LLM-generated HDL designs.The input to the proposed framework is a C/C++ program that specifies the target circuit's functionality. The program is provided to an LLM to directly generate an HDL design, whose syntax errors are repaired using a Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) mechanism. The functional correctness of the LLM-generated circuit is iteratively improved by comparing its simulated behavior with an HLS reference design produced by conventional HLS tools, which ensures the functional correctness of the result but can lead to suboptimal area and power efficiency. Experimental results demonstrate that circuits generated by the proposed framework achieve significantly better area and power efficiency than conventional HLS designs and approach the quality of human-engineered circuits. Meanwhile, the correctness of the resulting HDL implementation is maintained, highlighting the effectiveness and potential of agentic HDL design leveraging the generative capabilities of LLMs and the rigor of traditional correctness-driven IC design flows.

While intelligent tutoring systems (ITSs) can use information from past students to personalize instruction, each new student is unique. Moreover, the education problem is inherently difficult because the learning process is only partially observable. We therefore develop a dynamic, time-series environment to simulate a classroom setting, with student-teacher interventions - including tutoring sessions, lectures, and exams. In particular, we design the simulated environment to allow for varying levels of probing interventions that can gather more information. Then, we develop reinforcement learning ITSs that combine learning the individual state of students while pulling from population information through the use of probing interventions. These interventions can reduce the difficulty of student estimation, but also introduce a cost-benefit decision to find a balance between probing enough to get accurate estimates and probing so often that it becomes disruptive to the student. We compare the efficacy of standard RL algorithms with several greedy rules-based heuristic approaches to find that they provide different solutions, but with similar results. We also highlight the difficulty of the problem with increasing levels of hidden information, and the boost that we get if we allow for probing interventions. We show the flexibility of both heuristic and RL policies with regards to changing student population distributions, finding that both are flexible, but RL policies struggle to help harder classes. Finally, we test different course structures with non-probing policies and we find that our policies are able to boost the performance of quiz and midterm structures more than we can in a finals-only structure, highlighting the benefit of having additional information.

Recent LLMs have demonstrated sophisticated problem-solving capabilities on various benchmarks through advanced reasoning algorithms. However, the key research question of identifying reasoning steps that balance complexity and computational efficiency remains unsolved. Recent research has increasingly drawn upon psychological theories to explore strategies for optimizing cognitive pathways. The LLM's final outputs and intermediate steps are regarded as System 1 and System 2, respectively. However, an in-depth exploration of the System 2 reasoning is still lacking. Therefore, we propose a novel psychologically backed Scaffold Reasoning framework for code debugging, which encompasses the Scaffold Stream, Analytic Stream, and Integration Stream. The construction of reference code within the Scaffold Stream is integrated with the buggy code analysis results produced by the Analytic Stream through the Integration Stream. Our framework achieves an 88.91% pass rate and an average inference time of 5.36 seconds per-problem on DebugBench, outperforming other reasoning approaches across various LLMs in both reasoning accuracy and efficiency. Further analyses elucidate the advantages and limitations of various cognitive pathways across varying problem difficulties and bug types. Our findings also corroborate the alignment of the proposed Scaffold Reasoning framework with human cognitive processes.

Large language models (LLMs) have demonstrated strong performance on function-level code generation benchmarks, yet real-world software development increasingly demands class-level implementations that integrate multiple methods, attributes, and dependencies within authentic project contexts. This gap between benchmark performance and practical utility raises critical questions about LLMs' readiness for production code assistance, particularly regarding their ability to generalize across familiar and novel codebases. We introduce a benchmark derived from real-world open-source repositories, comprising classes divided into seen and unseen partitions to evaluate generalization under practical conditions. We systematically examine how input specification completeness and retrieval-augmented generation affect class-level correctness across multiple state-of-the-art LLMs. Our evaluation reveals a substantial performance gap: while LLMs achieve 84 to 89% correctness on synthetic benchmarks, they attain only 25 to 34% on real-world class tasks, with minimal distinction between familiar and novel codebases. Comprehensive documentation provides marginal improvements (1 to 3%), whereas retrieval augmentation yields greater gains (4 to 7%) by supplying concrete implementation patterns. Error analysis identifies AttributeError, TypeError, and AssertionError as dominant failure modes, with distinct patterns between synthetic and real-world scenarios. These findings provide actionable insights for enhancing context modelling, documentation strategies, and retrieval integration in production code assistance tools.

Large Language Models (LLMs) have substantially influenced various software engineering tasks. Indeed, in the case of software refactoring, traditional LLMs have shown the ability to reduce development time and enhance code quality. However, these LLMs often rely on static, detailed instructions for specific tasks. In contrast, LLM-based agents can dynamically adapt to evolving contexts and autonomously make decisions by interacting with software tools and executing workflows. In this paper, we explore the potential of LLM-based agents in supporting refactoring activities. Specifically, we introduce RefAgent, a multi-agent LLM-based framework for end-to-end software refactoring. RefAgent consists of specialized agents responsible for planning, executing, testing, and iteratively refining refactorings using self-reflection and tool-calling capabilities. We evaluate RefAgent on eight open-source Java projects, comparing its effectiveness against a single-agent approach, a search-based refactoring tool, and historical developer refactorings. Our assessment focuses on: (1) the impact of generated refactorings on software quality, (2) the ability to identify refactoring opportunities, and (3) the contribution of each LLM agent through an ablation study. Our results show that RefAgent achieves a median unit test pass rate of 90%, reduces code smells by a median of 52.5%, and improves key quality attributes (e.g., reusability) by a median of 8.6%. Additionally, it closely aligns with developer refactorings and the search-based tool in identifying refactoring opportunities, attaining a median F1-score of 79.15% and 72.7%, respectively. Compared to single-agent approaches, RefAgent improves the median unit test pass rate by 64.7% and the median compilation success rate by 40.1%. These findings highlight the promise of multi-agent architectures in advancing automated software refactoring.

With the emergence of large language models (LLMs), there is an expectation that LLMs can effectively extract explicit information from complex real-world documents (e.g., papers, reports). However, most LLMs generate paragraph-style answers that are chaotic, disorganized, and untraceable. To bridge this gap, we introduce the Arranged and Organized Extraction Benchmark (AOE), a new bilingual benchmark with data and documents of varying lengths designed to systematically evaluate the ability of LLMs to comprehend fragmented documents and reconstruct isolated information into one organized table. Unlike conventional text-to-table tasks, which rely on fixed schema and narrow task domains, AOE includes 11 carefully crafted tasks across three diverse domains, requiring models to generate context-specific schema tailored to varied input queries. In the experiment, we evaluated both open-source and closed-source state-of-the-art LLMs. The results show that even the most advanced models struggled significantly. The benchmark is available at https://anonymous.4open.science/r/AOE-Benchmark/.

Data selection is a critical aspect of Reinforcement Learning with Verifiable Rewards (RLVR) for enhancing the reasoning capabilities of large language models (LLMs). Current data selection methods are largely heuristic-based, lacking theoretical guarantees and generalizability. This work proposes a theoretically-grounded approach using influence functions to estimate the contribution of each data point to the learning objective. To overcome the prohibitive computational cost of policy rollouts required for online influence estimation, we introduce an off-policy influence estimation method that efficiently approximates data influence using pre-collected offline trajectories. Furthermore, to manage the high-dimensional gradients of LLMs, we employ sparse random projection to reduce dimensionality and improve storage and computation efficiency. Leveraging these techniques, we develop \textbf{C}urriculum \textbf{R}L with \textbf{O}ff-\textbf{P}olicy \text{I}nfluence guidance (\textbf{CROPI}), a multi-stage RL framework that iteratively selects the most influential data for the current policy. Experiments on models up to 7B parameters demonstrate that CROPI significantly accelerates training. On a 1.5B model, it achieves a 2.66x step-level acceleration while using only 10\% of the data per stage compared to full-dataset training. Our results highlight the substantial potential of influence-based data selection for efficient RLVR.

Large Language Models (LLMs) are used for Register-Transfer Level (RTL) code generation, but they face two main challenges: functional correctness and Power, Performance, and Area (PPA) optimization. Iterative, feedback-based methods partially address these, but they are limited to local search, hindering the discovery of a global optimum. This paper introduces REvolution, a framework that combines Evolutionary Computation (EC) with LLMs for automatic RTL generation and optimization. REvolution evolves a population of candidates in parallel, each defined by a design strategy, RTL implementation, and evaluation feedback. The framework includes a dual-population algorithm that divides candidates into Fail and Success groups for bug fixing and PPA optimization, respectively. An adaptive mechanism further improves search efficiency by dynamically adjusting the selection probability of each prompt strategy according to its success rate. Experiments on the VerilogEval and RTLLM benchmarks show that REvolution increased the initial pass rate of various LLMs by up to 24.0 percentage points. The DeepSeek-V3 model achieved a final pass rate of 95.5\%, comparable to state-of-the-art results, without the need for separate training or domain-specific tools. Additionally, the generated RTL designs showed significant PPA improvements over reference designs. This work introduces a new RTL design approach by combining LLMs' generative capabilities with EC's broad search power, overcoming the local-search limitations of previous methods.

Large language models (LLMs) have been increasingly adopted across the scientific research pipeline, assisting tasks from ideation to writing (Zhang et al., 2025; Si et al., 2024). However, generating correct and executable research code remains a difficult problem, not only because it requires long-range reasoning and robust verification (Padigela et al., 2025; Starace et al., 2025; Zhu et al., 2025), but also because the input contexts in research settings are often complex, indirect, and noisy. Research papers describe methods through high-level narratives, mathematical formulas, and domain-specific conventions, with many implementation details left implicit. As a result, translating these fragmented and underspecified descriptions into functional code remains a fundamental challenge for current LLMs (Li et al., 2025b;a). Existing benchmarks for research code generation (Zheng et al., 2023; Sun et al., 2023; Toledo et al., 2025; Hua et al., 2025) primarily evaluate models in a non-interactive setting, where they are expected to produce correct code in a single response. This design neglects the crucial role of human feedback in realistic workflows: on the one hand, users often cannot fully specify their requirements in one shot.