Logic Meets Magic: LLMs Cracking Smart Contract Vulnerabilities
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Smart contract vulnerabilities caused significant economic losses in blockchain applications. Large Language Models (LLMs) provide new possibilities for addressing this time-consuming task. However, state-of-the-art LLM-based detection solutions are often plagued by high false-positive rates. In this paper, we push the boundaries of existing research in two key ways. First, our evaluation is based on Solidity v0.8, offering the most up-to-date insights compared to prior studies that focus on older versions (v0.4). Second, we leverage the latest five LLM models (across companies), ensuring comprehensive coverage across the most advanced capabilities in the field. We conducted a series of rigorous evaluations. Our experiments demonstrate that a well-designed prompt can reduce the false-positive rate by over 60%. Surprisingly, we also discovered that the recall rate for detecting some specific vulnerabilities in Solidity v0.8 has dropped to just 13% compared to earlier versions (i.e., v0.4). Further analysis reveals the root cause of this decline: the reliance of LLMs on identifying changes in newly introduced libraries and frameworks during detection.
Key facts. Cited by 5 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 31 of its 67 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 13 Jan 2025.
Builds on
31 of 67 references.
References · 31
- 2023Qwen Technical Reportcited by 3,344
- 2023A Survey of Large Language Modelscited by 2,576
- 2024Qwen2 Technical Reportcited by 2,120
- 2021Asleep at the Keyboard? Assessing the Security of GitHub Copilot's Code Contributionscited by 431
- 2024LLM Agents can Autonomously Exploit One-day Vulnerabilitiescited by 128
- 2023InferFix: End-to-End Program Repair with LLMscited by 114
- 2021Examining Zero-Shot Vulnerability Repair with Large Language Modelscited by 105
- 2023LLMs Cannot Reliably Identify and Reason About Security Vulnerabilities (Yet?): A Comprehensive Evaluation, Framework, and Benchmarkscited by 97
- 2022Lost at C: A User Study on the Security Implications of Large Language Model Code Assistantscited by 91
- 2019Slither: A Static Analysis Framework For Smart Contractscited by 89
- 2023GPTScan: Detecting Logic Vulnerabilities in Smart Contracts by Combining GPT with Program Analysiscited by 65
- 2023When ChatGPT Meets Smart Contract Vulnerability Detection: How Far Are We?cited by 42
19 more
- 2024Combining Fine-Tuning and LLM-based Agents for Intuitive Smart Contract Auditing with Justificationscited by 41
- 2022Transformer-Based Language Models for Software Vulnerability Detectioncited by 39
- 2019Empirical Review of Automated Analysis Tools on 47,587 Ethereum Smart Contractscited by 36
- 2023Do you still need a manual smart contract audit?cited by 35
- 2021Non-Fungible Token (NFT): Overview, Evaluation, Opportunities and Challengescited by 25
- 2021SoK: Decentralized Finance (DeFi)cited by 23
- 2019An Overview on Smart Contracts: Challenges, Advances and Platformscited by 20
- 2018Finding The Greedy, Prodigal, and Suicidal Contracts at Scalecited by 19
- 2020sFuzz: An Efficient Adaptive Fuzzer for Solidity Smart Contractscited by 19
- 2018Vandal: A Scalable Security Analysis Framework for Smart Contractscited by 18
- 2020SmartBugs: A Framework to Analyze Solidity Smart Contractscited by 18
- 2023Rethinking Smart Contract Fuzzing: Fuzzing With Invocation Ordering and Important Branch Revisitingcited by 10
- 2016Smart Contract Templates: foundations, design landscape and research directionscited by 6
- 2024LLM4Fuzz: Guided Fuzzing of Smart Contracts with Large Language Modelscited by 5
- 2022BlockScope: Detecting and Investigating Propagated Vulnerabilities in Forked Blockchain Projectscited by 4
- 2023SmartBugs 2.0: An Execution Framework for Weakness Detection in Ethereum Smart Contractscited by 4
- 2023Decentralized Finance (DeFi): A Surveycited by 4
- 2022Exploring Web3 From the View of Blockchaincited by 3
- 2024Detect Llama -- Finding Vulnerabilities in Smart Contracts using Large Language Modelscited by 2
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2025: 3; 2026: 2.
5 papers.
- 2025Prompt to Pwn: Automated Exploit Generation for Smart Contractscited by 4
- 2025Domain Specific Benchmarks for Evaluating Multimodal Large Language Modelscited by 3
- 2025Validating Solidity Code Defects using Symbolic and Concrete Execution powered by Large Language Modelscited by 0
- 2026Benchmarking Zero-Shot Reasoning Approaches for Error Detection in Solidity Smart Contractscited by 0
- 2026Benchmarking LLM-Based Static Analysis for Secure Smart Contract Development: Reliability, Limitations, and Potential Hybrid Solutionscited by 0
- 2026Benchmarking LLM-Based Static Analysis for Secure Smart Contract Development: Reliability, Limitations, and Potential Hybrid Solutions11 May 2026
- 2026Benchmarking Zero-Shot Reasoning Approaches for Error Detection in Solidity Smart Contracts17 Feb 2026
- 2025Validating Solidity Code Defects using Symbolic and Concrete Execution powered by Large Language Models16 Sep 2025
- 2025Prompt to Pwn: Automated Exploit Generation for Smart Contracts2 Aug 2025
- 2025Domain Specific Benchmarks for Evaluating Multimodal Large Language Models15 Jun 2025