Zhendong Su
Publications
Agentic Harness for Real-World Compilers
Compilers are critical to modern computing, yet fixing compiler bugs is difficult. While recent large language model (LLM) advancements enable automated bug repair, compiler bugs pose unique challenges due to their complexity, deep cross-domain expertise requirements, and sparse, non-descriptive bug reports, necessitating compiler-specific tools. To bridge the gap, we introduce llvm-autofix, the first agentic harness designed to assist LLM agents in understanding and fixing compiler bugs. Our focus is on LLVM, one of the most widely used compiler infrastructures. Central to llvm-autofix are agent-friendly LLVM tools, a benchmark llvm-bench of reproducible LLVM bugs, and a tailored minimal agent llvm-autofix-mini for fixing LLVM bugs. Our evaluation demonstrates a performance decline of 60% in frontier models when tackling compiler bugs compared with common software bugs. Our minimal agent llvm-autofix-mini also outperforms the state-of-the-art by approximately 22%. This emphasizes the necessity for specialized harnesses like ours to close the loop between LLMs and compiler engineering. We believe this work establishes a foundation for advancing LLM capabilities in complex systems like compilers. GitHub: https://github.com/dtcxzyw/llvm-autofix
Stepwise: Neuro-Symbolic Proof Search for Automated Systems Verification
Formal verification via interactive theorem proving is increasingly used to ensure the correctness of critical systems, yet constructing large proof scripts remains highly manual and limits scalability. Advances in large language models (LLMs), especially in mathematical reasoning, make their integration into software verification increasingly promising. This paper introduces a neuro-symbolic proof generation framework designed to automate proof search for systems-level verification projects. The framework performs a best-first tree search over proof states, repeatedly querying an LLM for the next candidate proof step. On the neural side, we fine-tune LLMs using datasets of proof state-step pairs; on the symbolic side, we incorporate a range of ITP tools to repair rejected steps, filter and rank proof states, and automatically discharge subgoals when search progress stalls. This synergy enables data-efficient LLM adaptation and semantics-informed pruning of the search space. We implement the framework on a new Isabelle REPL that exposes fine-grained proof states and automation tools, and evaluate it on the FVEL seL4 benchmark and additional Isabelle developments. On seL4, the system proves up to 77.6\% of the theorems, substantially surpassing previous LLM-based approaches and standalone Sledgehammer, while solving significantly more multi-step proofs. Results across further benchmarks demonstrate strong generalization, indicating a viable path toward scalable automated software verification.
Goedel-Code-Prover: Hierarchical Proof Search for Open State-of-the-Art Code Verification
Large language models (LLMs) can generate plausible code but offer limited guarantees of correctness. Formally verifying that implementations satisfy specifications requires constructing machine-checkable proofs, a task that remains beyond current automation. We propose a hierarchical proof search framework for automated code verification in Lean~4 that decomposes complex verification goals into structurally simpler subgoals before attempting tactic-level proving. Central to our approach is a principled decomposition score that combines constructive justification with structural effectiveness. The same score serves as both the training reward and the inference-time ranking criterion, aligning optimization and deployment. We train Goedel Code Prover, a single unified policy for both decomposition and completion, through supervised initialization followed by hybrid reinforcement learning, where a continuous decomposition reward supports planning exploration while supervised replay stabilizes proof generation. On three Lean-based code verification benchmarks comprising 427 tasks, our 8B-parameter model achieves a 62.0% prove success rate, a 2.6 improvement over the strongest baseline under the reported inference settings. We further observe consistent inference-time scaling: success rates improve monotonically with search iterations and sampling budget, while whole-proof baselines plateau within the evaluated budgets.