Papers › CodeSpecBench: Benchmarking LLMs for Executable Behavioral Specification Generation

CodeSpecBench: Benchmarking LLMs for Executable Behavioral Specification Generation

14 Apr 2026arXiv:2604.12268added by Syntology

Zaoyu Chen, Jianbo Dai, Boyu Zhu, Jingdong Wang, Huiming Wang, Xin Xu, Haoyang Yuan, Zhijiang Guo, Xiao-Ming Wu

Title, abstract, authors and date from arXiv's metadata (CC0); this paper is not in the Papers with Code archive (frozen 2025-07-28).

Large language models (LLMs) can generate code from natural language, but the extent to which they capture intended program behavior remains unclear. Executable behavioral specifications, defined via preconditions and postconditions, provide a concrete means to assess such understanding. However, existing work on specification generation is constrained in evaluation methodology, task settings, and specification expressiveness. We introduce CodeSpecBench, a benchmark for executable behavioral specification generation under an execution-based evaluation protocol. CodeSpecBench supports both function-level and repository-level tasks and encodes specifications as executable Python functions. Constructed from diverse real-world codebases, it enables a realistic assessment of both correctness (accepting valid behaviors) and completeness (rejecting invalid behaviors). Evaluating 15 state-of-the-art LLMs on CodeSpecBench, we observe a sharp performance degradation on repository-level tasks, where the best model attains only a 20.2% pass rate. We further find that specification generation is substantially more challenging than code generation, indicating that strong coding performance does not necessarily reflect deep understanding of intended program semantics. Our data and code are available at https://github.com/SparksofAGI/CodeSpecBench.

PaperPDFCode Syntology ran

In Syntology Open this paper in Syntology's Atlas, the map of the papers in Syntology's graph and their citations.

For agents, Syntology's MCP tool lists every function and class Syntology harvested from this paper and whether it ran (how to connect): get_harvested_code_for_paper(arxiv_id="2604.12268")

Code

Syntology Ran 4 of 10 code samples harvested from 1 repository linked to this paper; 6 have no recorded run. Of those that ran: 3 ran · our draft was wrong; 1 ran with no contract checked.

By repository: found in paper text by Syntology: 10 samples from 1 repository, 4 ran. The run record, sample by sample. “Ran” means executed on a synthesized input, not that the code is correct or reproduces the paper.

SparksofAGI/CodeSpecBench found in paper text by Syntology report

Reachability, where shown, is from one Syntology probe window (2026-09-16 to 2026-09-18); repositories not probed show nothing. GitHub stars are not tracked.

Code Syntology ran Syntology

10 samples harvested; 4 ran; 0 honoured the contract we drafted; 6 have no recorded run. Read from Syntology's graph 2026-09-24; that is when this build read the record, not when the samples ran.

3ran · our draft was wrong
1ran
6unverified

Licence: 10 of the 10 samples are pointer only, meaning Syntology does not serve that copy's text. This page shows no code text for any sample; each one links to its file in the repository.

Harvested from SparksofAGI/CodeSpecBench. “Ran” means the sample executed on a synthesized input. It does not mean the output is correct, and nothing here reproduces the paper's results. “Honoured” and “violated” refer to a contract Syntology drafted from the code itself; “our draft was wrong” and “fixture could not drive it” are failures of Syntology's instrument, not of the code.

Each sample ends with its code_sha256, Syntology's identity for that exact code. An agent fetches the stored sample with Syntology's MCP tool get_code(code_sha256="…") (how to connect); click an identity to copy that call.

Repository labels, per sample. official repository: The archive marks this repository official for the paper. named in the paper: The archive records that the paper mentions this repository; it is not marked official. community (archive-listed): In the archive's code links for this paper, not marked official and not recorded as mentioned in the paper. found in paper text by Syntology: Syntology found this repository in the paper's own text; whether it is the authors' implementation is not asserted. community: Not in the archive's code links for this paper; a community repository Syntology harvested. Samples from a repository marked official are listed first. Licence labels name the repository's licence as recorded at harvest. “Pointer only” means Syntology does not serve that copy's text, for one of four reasons: no licence file was found; the licence was not identified; the licence is recorded as permissive but that copy's record is not marked cleared; or the licence is outside the permissive list Syntology serves text under (MIT, Apache-2.0, BSD and similar). Some licences outside that list permit redistribution, such as WTFPL, and GPL-3.0 under its conditions; they are simply not on the list. Hover a licence label for the reason. File links open the file on GitHub at the default branch, which may have changed since the harvest.

chdir SparksofAGI/CodeSpecBench/CodeSpecBench-Func/spec-verifier/evaluation.py found in paper text by Syntology ran · our draft was wrong no licence file found · pointer only · 915e14b3dec02919 · report
create_tempdir SparksofAGI/CodeSpecBench/CodeSpecBench-Func/spec-verifier/evaluation.py found in paper text by Syntology ran no licence file found · pointer only · 5d9e50968009ebec · report
read_problems SparksofAGI/CodeSpecBench/CodeSpecBench-Func/spec-verifier/evaluation.py found in paper text by Syntology ran · our draft was wrong no licence file found · pointer only · 1e2d6367f1b86235 · report
stream_jsonl SparksofAGI/CodeSpecBench/CodeSpecBench-Func/spec-verifier/evaluation.py found in paper text by Syntology ran · our draft was wrong no licence file found · pointer only · b50a1e89700bd164 · report
check_correctness SparksofAGI/CodeSpecBench/CodeSpecBench-Func/spec-verifier/evaluation.py found in paper text by Syntology unverified no licence file found · pointer only · 8f623a2fab794092 · report
evaluate_functional_correctness SparksofAGI/CodeSpecBench/CodeSpecBench-Func/spec-verifier/evaluation.py found in paper text by Syntology unverified no licence file found · pointer only · f4a71b4883f98af4 · report
openai_completion_process SparksofAGI/CodeSpecBench/CodeSpecBench-Func/spec-verifier/evaluation.py found in paper text by Syntology unverified no licence file found · pointer only · 1fac7c67eb0f9f0c · report
reliability_guard SparksofAGI/CodeSpecBench/CodeSpecBench-Func/spec-verifier/evaluation.py found in paper text by Syntology unverified no licence file found · pointer only · c5042f4e7dbe8e89 · report
unsafe_execute SparksofAGI/CodeSpecBench/CodeSpecBench-Func/spec-verifier/evaluation.py found in paper text by Syntology unverified no licence file found · pointer only · 6abe910b03ba0fcc · report
write_jsonl SparksofAGI/CodeSpecBench/CodeSpecBench-Func/spec-verifier/evaluation.py found in paper text by Syntology unverified no licence file found · pointer only · 2b896fdffd2d763a · report

Results from the paper

The Papers with Code archive ends with its 2025-07-28 snapshot. This paper's arXiv identifier, 2604.12268, was issued in April 2026, after that date, so the archive has no leaderboard rows for it.

Report a problem or propose a change · a person checks every report against the paper or source before anything changes; decisions are listed on /corrections