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