Corina S. Pasareanu

Leveraging Large Language Models (LLMs) for code generation has increasingly emerged as a common practice in the domain of software engineering. Relevant benchmarks have been established to evaluate the code generation capabilities of LLMs. However, existing benchmarks focus primarily on sequential code, lacking the ability to effectively evaluate LLMs on concurrent code generation. Compared to sequential code, concurrent code exhibits greater complexity and possesses unique types of bugs, such as deadlocks and race conditions, that do not occur in sequential code. Therefore, a benchmark for evaluating sequential code generation cannot be useful for evaluating concurrent code generation with LLMs. To address this gap, we designed a benchmark CONCUR specifically aimed at evaluating the capability of LLMs to generate concurrent code. CONCUR consists of a base set of 43 concurrency problems derived from a standard concurrency textbook, together with 72 validated mutant variants, resulting in 115 total problems. The base problems serve as the semantic core of the benchmark, while the mutants expand linguistic and structural diversity. We conducted an evaluation of a range of LLMs on CONCUR, highlighting limitations of current models. Overall, our work provides a novel direction for evaluating the capability of LLMs to generate code with focus on concurrency.

How LLM agents present AI software engineering workflows of the future, and whether the focus of programming will shift from scale to trust.

Recent advances in automated programming have the potential to reduce human involvement in the software engineering process, but this can lead to less trustworthy software. We envision a three-pronged approach to automating the engineering of trustworthy software that involves (1) eliciting requirements from users and automatically generating formal specifications encoding users’ intent, (2) automatically synthesizing source code conforming to those specifications, and (3) automatically synthesizing formal proofs to verify the correctness of the produced software. We describe this vision and the state of the art in each of these three areas, and the research challenges that must be overcome in each area and in their integration.

Many security- and performance-critical domains, such as cryptography, rely on low-level verification to minimize the trusted computing surface and allow code to be written directly in assembly. However, verifying assembly code against a realistic machine model is a challenging task. Furthermore, certain security properties—such as constant-time behavior—require relational reasoning that goes beyond traditional correctness by linking multiple execution traces within a single specification. Yet, relational verification has been extensively explored at a higher level of abstraction. In this work, we introduce a Hoare-style logic that provides low-level, expressive relational verification. We demonstrate our approach on the s2n-bignum library, proving both constant-time discipline and equivalence between optimized and verification-friendly routines. Formalized in HOL Light, our results confirm the real-world applicability of relational verification in large assembly codebases.