mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

VeriContest: A Competitive-Programming Benchmark for Verifiable Code Generation

arXiv 2605.08553 ↗First posted 8 May 2026cs.SE cs.AI cs.LGcited by 3

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Large language models can generate useful code from natural language, but their outputs come without correctness guarantees. Verifiable code generation offers a path beyond testing by requiring models to produce not only executable code, but also formal specifications and machine-checkable proofs. Progress in this direction, however, is difficult to measure: existing benchmarks are often small, focus on only one part of the pipeline, lack ground-truth proofs or rigorous specification validation, or target verification settings far from mainstream software development. We present VeriContest, a benchmark of 946 competitive-programming problems from LeetCode and Codeforces for verifiable code generation in Rust with Verus. Each problem pairs a natural language description with expert-validated formal specifications, judge-accepted Rust code, Verus-checked proofs, and positive and negative test suites. VeriContest is constructed through a three-phase pipeline that scales from manually verified seed problems to semi-automated expansion with human-in-the-loop review. To further strengthen benchmark quality, we use testing as an additional quality-assurance layer for validating postcondition completeness. VeriContest supports isolated and compositional evaluation of specification generation, code generation, proof generation, and end-to-end verified program synthesis. Evaluating ten state-of-the-art models reveals a sharp gap between coding ability and verifiable code generation: the strongest model reaches 92.18% on natural-language-to-code generation, but only 48.31% on specification generation, 13.95% on proof generation, and 5.29% end-to-end. These results identify proof and specification generation as the central bottlenecks for models and establish VeriContest as a rigorous platform for measuring and training future systems that generate code with machine-checkable correctness.

Key facts. Cited by 3 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 33 of its 46 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 8 May 2026.

Builds on

33 of 46 references.

References · 33

  1. 2021Evaluating Large Language Models Trained on Codecited by 8,320
  2. 2021Program Synthesis with Large Language Modelscited by 3,637
  3. 2023SWE-bench: Can Language Models Resolve Real-World GitHub Issues?cited by 3,373
  4. 2024LiveCodeBench: Holistic and Contamination Free Evaluation of Large Language Models for Codecited by 2,004
  5. 2026DeepSeek-V4: Towards Highly Efficient Million-Token Context Intelligencecited by 1,040
  6. 2021Measuring Coding Challenge Competence With APPScited by 902
  7. 2024Towards AI-Assisted Synthesis of Verified Dafny Methodscited by 58
  8. 2024DafnyBench: A Benchmark for Formal Software Verificationcited by 57
  9. 2024AutoVerus: Automated Proof Generation for Rust Codecited by 49
  10. 2025CodeContests+: High-Quality Test Case Generation for Competitive Programmingcited by 46
  11. 2025VERINA: Benchmarking Verifiable Code Generationcited by 34
  12. 2023Can Large Language Models Write Good Property-Based Tests?cited by 31
21 more
  1. 2024Towards Understanding the Characteristics of Code Generation Errors Made by Large Language Modelscited by 30
  2. 2025CLEVER: A Curated Benchmark for Formally Verified Code Generationcited by 29
  3. 2025Large Language Models for Code Generation: A Comprehensive Survey of Challenges, Techniques, Evaluation, and Applicationscited by 26
  4. 2025KNighter: Transforming Static Analysis with LLM-Synthesized Checkerscited by 24
  5. 2025HardTests: Synthesizing High-Quality Test Cases for LLM Codingcited by 23
  6. 2025A benchmark for vericoding: formally verified program synthesiscited by 20
  7. 2025Proving the Coding Interview: A Benchmark for Formally Verified Code Generationcited by 19
  8. 2024miniCodeProps: a Minimal Benchmark for Proving Code Propertiescited by 18
  9. 2025Can LLMs Reason About Program Semantics? A Comprehensive Evaluation of LLMs on Formal Specification Inferencecited by 16
  10. 2025VeruSAGE: A Study of Agent-Based Verification for Rust Systemscited by 12
  11. 2026AlgoVeri: An Aligned Benchmark for Verified Code Generation on Classical Algorithmscited by 12
  12. 2026AI IDEs or Autonomous Agents? Measuring the Impact of Coding Agents on Software Developmentcited by 11
  13. 2025VerifyThisBench: Generating Code, Specifications, and Proofs All at Oncecited by 9
  14. 2025Can LLMs Generate Reliable Test Case Generators? A Study on Competition-Level Programming Problemscited by 9
  15. 2025VeriStruct: AI-assisted Automated Verification of Data-Structure Modules in Veruscited by 9
  16. 2026CodeHacker: Automated Test Case Generation for Detecting Vulnerabilities in Competitive Programming Solutionscited by 8
  17. 2024Beyond Static Pattern Matching? Rethinking Automatic Cryptographic API Misuse Detection in the Era of LLMscited by 6
  18. 2025Beyond Postconditions: Can Large Language Models infer Formal Contracts for Automatic Software Verification?cited by 6
  19. 2025Security Vulnerabilities in AI-Generated Code: A Large-Scale Analysis of Public GitHub Repositoriescited by 5
  20. 2025RAG-Verus: Repository-Level Program Verification with LLMs using Retrieval Augmented Generationcited by 4
  21. 2025FormalSpecCpp: A Dataset of C++ Formal Specifications created using LLMscited by 2

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 14 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2026: 3.

3 papers.