Semantic-Aware Fuzzing: An Empirical Framework for LLM-Guided, Reasoning-Driven Input Mutation
On the map: LLM reasoning → Reasoning for agents, planning and code
Abstract (arXiv)
Security vulnerabilities in Internet-of-Things devices, mobile platforms, and autonomous systems remain critical. Traditional mutation-based fuzzers -- while effectively explore code paths -- primarily perform byte- or bit-level edits without semantic reasoning. Coverage-guided tools such as AFL++ use dictionaries, grammars, and splicing heuristics to impose shallow structural constraints, leaving deeper protocol logic, inter-field dependencies, and domain-specific semantics unaddressed. Conversely, reasoning-capable large language models (LLMs) can leverage pretraining knowledge to understand input formats, respect complex constraints, and propose targeted mutations, much like an experienced reverse engineer or testing expert. However, lacking ground truth for "correct" mutation reasoning makes supervised fine-tuning impractical, motivating explorations of off-the-shelf LLMs via prompt-based few-shot learning. To bridge this gap, we present an open-source microservices framework that integrates reasoning LLMs with AFL++ on Google's FuzzBench, tackling asynchronous execution and divergent hardware demands (GPU- vs. CPU-intensive) of LLMs and fuzzers. We evaluate four research questions: (R1) How can reasoning LLMs be integrated into the fuzzing mutation loop? (R2) Do few-shot prompts yield higher-quality mutations than zero-shot? (R3) Can prompt engineering with off-the-shelf models improve fuzzing directly? and (R4) Which open-source reasoning LLMs perform best under prompt-only conditions? Experiments with Llama3.3, Deepseek-r1-Distill-Llama-70B, QwQ-32B, and Gemma3 highlight Deepseek as the most promising. Mutation effectiveness depends more on prompt complexity and model choice than shot count. Response latency and throughput bottlenecks remain key obstacles, offering directions for future work.
Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026). Placed in Reasoning for agents, planning and code, one of 17 directions in LLM reasoning. Builds on 14 of its 47 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 23 Sep 2025.
Builds on
14 of 47 references.
References · 14
- 2024The Llama 3 Herd of Modelscited by 14,715
- 2022Chain-of-Thought Prompting Elicits Reasoning in Large Language Modelscited by 12,459
- 2025DeepSeek-R1: Incentivizing Reasoning Capability in LLMs via Reinforcement Learningcited by 6,330
- 2025Gemma 3 Technical Reportcited by 1,824
- 2021A Survey on Automated Fact-Checkingcited by 378
- 2023Role-Play with Large Language Modelscited by 294
- 2023Fuzz4All: Universal Fuzzing with Large Language Modelscited by 88
- 2022Beyond Text Generation: Supporting Writers with Continuous Automatic Text Summariescited by 47
- 2024LLM-Inference-Bench: Inference Benchmarking of Large Language Models on AI Acceleratorscited by 32
- 2023Prompt Fuzzing for Fuzz Driver Generationcited by 27
- 2018NEUZZ: Efficient Fuzzing with Neural Program Smoothingcited by 19
- 2022DriveFuzz: Discovering Autonomous Driving Bugs through Driving Quality-Guided Fuzzingcited by 19
Built on by
Not cited yet.
Similar, not cited
Close in wording, no citation either way
- 2026Large Language Models for Fuzz Testing in Microservices: A Systematic Literature Review ↗
- 2026SeedSmith: LLM-Driven Seed Synthesis for Directed Fuzzing ↗
- 2025Hybrid Fuzzing with LLM-Guided Input Mutation and Semantic Feedback
- 2025LibLMFuzz: LLM-Augmented Fuzz Target Generation for Black-box Libraries
- 2026Agentic Fuzzing: Opportunities and Challenges
- 2025MALF: A Multi-Agent LLM Framework for Intelligent Fuzzing of Industrial Control Protocols
- 2026Rethinking On-Device LLM Reasoning: Why Analogical Mapping Outperforms Abstract Thinking for IoT DDoS Detection ↗
- 2026FuzzPilot: Plateau-Triggered Recipe Validation for Structured Text Fuzzing ↗