CHAINTRIX: A multi-pipeline LLM-augmented framework for automated smart-contract security auditing
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Smart-contract exploits have caused billions of USD in cumulative losses, yet audits remain expensive and slow. Automated tools have emerged to close this gap, but each class has a characteristic failure mode. Static analyzers report findings that frequently fail manual triage at high rates, while large language models (LLMs) hallucinate findings that contradict the source code. Thus, we propose Chaintrix, an end-to-end auditing framework whose central architectural commitment is that every LLM-generated claim must be discharged against a deterministic structural contract representation. We introduce a Cross-Contract Interaction Model (CCIM) that parses Solidity into a structured map of function-level reads, writes, modifiers and resolved cross-contract calls. CCIM serves as the substrate against which all 12 of Chaintrix's deterministic signal engines and the parallel LLM audit pipelines operate. A staged false-positive-reduction pipeline, terminating in a Structural Verdict Engine (SVE) that applies deterministic structural checks against parsed code, filters the merged finding set, with selected high-confidence findings further validated through symbolic execution and fuzz testing. We evaluate Chaintrix on EVMbench, the smart-contract security benchmark by OpenAI, Paradigm, OtterSec. Chaintrix detects 86 of 120 high-severity vulnerabilities (71.7% recall), with 25 audits scoring 100% recall, placing Chaintrix 26 percentage points above the strongest frontier-model baseline.
Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 12 of its 29 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 10 May 2026.
Builds on
12 of 29 references.
References · 12
- 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
- 2018Securify: Practical Security Analysis of Smart Contractscited by 61
- 2023When ChatGPT Meets Smart Contract Vulnerability Detection: How Far Are We?cited by 42
- 2024PropertyGPT: LLM-driven Formal Verification of Smart Contracts through Retrieval-Augmented Property Generationcited by 37
- 2019Empirical Review of Automated Analysis Tools on 47,587 Ethereum Smart Contractscited by 36
- 2021Combining Graph Neural Networks with Expert Knowledge for Smart Contract Vulnerability Detectioncited by 34
- 2020How Effective are Smart Contract Analysis Tools? Evaluating Smart Contract Static Analysis Tools Using Bug Injectioncited by 20
- 2026EVMbench: Evaluating AI Agents on Smart Contract Securitycited by 7
- 2023OpenSCV: An Open Hierarchical Taxonomy for Smart Contract Vulnerabilitiescited by 3
- 2026Re-Evaluating EVMBench: Are AI Agents Ready for Smart Contract Security?cited by 3
- 2025NumScout: Unveiling Numerical Defects in Smart Contracts using LLM-Pruning Symbolic Executioncited by 2
Built on by
Not cited yet.