mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

Trusta: Reasoning about Assurance Cases with Formal Methods and Large Language Models

arXiv 2309.12941 ↗First posted 22 Sep 2023cs.SE cs.AIcited by 3

On the map: LLM reasoning → Reasoning for agents, planning and code

Abstract (arXiv)

Assurance cases can be used to argue for the safety of products in safety engineering. In safety-critical areas, the construction of assurance cases is indispensable. Trustworthiness Derivation Trees (TDTs) enhance assurance cases by incorporating formal methods, rendering it possible for automatic reasoning about assurance cases. We present Trustworthiness Derivation Tree Analyzer (Trusta), a desktop application designed to automatically construct and verify TDTs. The tool has a built-in Prolog interpreter in its backend, and is supported by the constraint solvers Z3 and MONA. Therefore, it can solve constraints about logical formulas involving arithmetic, sets, Horn clauses etc. Trusta also utilizes large language models to make the creation and evaluation of assurance cases more convenient. It allows for interactive human examination and modification. We evaluated top language models like ChatGPT-3.5, ChatGPT-4, and PaLM 2 for generating assurance cases. Our tests showed a 50%-80% similarity between machine-generated and human-created cases. In addition, Trusta can extract formal constraints from text in natural languages, facilitating an easier interpretation and validation process. This extraction is subject to human review and correction, blending the best of automated efficiency with human insight. To our knowledge, this marks the first integration of large language models in automatic creating and reasoning about assurance cases, bringing a novel approach to a traditional challenge. Through several industrial case studies, Trusta has proven to quickly find some subtle issues that are typically missed in manual inspection, demonstrating its practical value in enhancing the assurance case development process.

Key facts. Cited by 3 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Placed in Reasoning for agents, planning and code, one of 17 directions in LLM reasoning. Builds on 5 of its 54 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 22 Sep 2023.

Builds on

5 of 54 references.

References · 5

  1. 2017Attention Is All You Needcited by 59,932
  2. 2020Evolution of Semantic Similarity -- A Surveycited by 83
  3. 2023nl2spec: Interactively Translating Unstructured Natural Language to Temporal Logics with Large Language Modelscited by 57
  4. 2020Integration of Formal Proof into Unified Assurance Cases with Isabelle/SACMcited by 5
  5. 2020Enhancing Covid-19 Decision-Making by Creating an Assurance Case for Simulation Modelscited by 1

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 7 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2023: 1; 2024: 0; 2025: 0; 2026: 2.

3 papers.

Similar, not cited

Close in wording, no citation either way

  1. 2024Automating Semantic Analysis of System Assurance Cases using Goal-directed ASP
  2. 2025Explainable Compliance Detection with Multi-Hop Natural Language Inference on Assurance Case Structure
  3. 2026ART: Adaptive Reasoning Trees for Explainable Claim Verification
  4. 2025A Comprehensive Survey on Trustworthiness in Reasoning with Large Language Models
  5. 2026Compliance-by-Construction Argument Graphs: Using Generative AI to Produce Evidence-Linked Formal Arguments for Certification-Grade Accountability
  6. 2023Explainable Claim Verification via Knowledge-Grounded Reasoning with Large Language Models
  7. 2025TRUST: A Decentralized Framework for Auditing Large Language Model Reasoning
  8. 2026TrustDABench: Benchmarking Reliability and Robustness of LLMs for Structured Data Analysis