mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

EduPluginBench: Executable Assurance for AI-Generated Educational Plugins

arXiv 2608.00739 ↗First posted 1 Aug 2026cs.SE cs.AIcited by 0

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Code-generation models can produce executable components, but compilation and functional tests do not establish compliance with least privilege, telemetry consent, provenance, privileged-write authority, lifecycle constraints, or bounded failure. We introduce EduPluginBench, an executable benchmark and staged admission method for generated plugins in governed software ecosystems. Across 1,440 activation-checked first-order mutants from 30 specifications, P0-P4 increased release-blocking-defect recall by 74.7 percentage points (specification-clustered 95% CI 73.4-75.8) over P0-P2, with no observed rejection among 120 clean references (95% Wilson upper bound 3.1%). A frozen transfer study of 600 unmodified generations from two current coding models found that 300/600 parsed, but none passed P0 or achieved P0-P4 conformance (95% upper bound 0.64%); downstream assurance estimands were undefined. An independently labelled Moodle study retained 16 vulnerable/fixed pairs; the frozen generic PHP detector found no vulnerable revisions. These negative transfer results prevent controlled contract consistency from being read as independent real-defect effectiveness. An earlier 540-generation diagnostic found that post-hoc bounded repair yielded 112 P0 passes, all nonconforming, with recall increasing from 13.4% to 100%. The artifact retains protocols, public-source provenance, raw generations, row-level decisions, audits, analysis code, and reproduction instructions.

Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 17 of its 37 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 1 Aug 2026.

Builds on

17 of 37 references.

References · 17

  1. 2021Evaluating Large Language Models Trained on Codecited by 8,053
  2. 2023SWE-bench: Can Language Models Resolve Real-World GitHub Issues?cited by 3,193
  3. 2024DeepSeek-Coder: When the Large Language Model Meets Programming -- The Rise of Code Intelligencecited by 1,154
  4. 2025Phi-4-Mini Technical Report: Compact yet Powerful Multimodal Language Models via Mixture-of-LoRAscited by 491
  5. 2021Asleep at the Keyboard? Assessing the Security of GitHub Copilot's Code Contributionscited by 417
  6. 2023Self-collaboration Code Generation via ChatGPTcited by 255
  7. 2022Do Users Write More Insecure Code with AI Assistants?cited by 186
  8. 2023An Empirical Study of the Non-determinism of ChatGPT in Code Generationcited by 134
  9. 2023Purple Llama CyberSecEval: A Secure Coding Benchmark for Language Modelscited by 130
  10. 2025CWEval: Outcome-driven Evaluation on Functionality and Security of LLM Code Generationcited by 55
  11. 2025CodeIF-Bench: Evaluating Instruction-Following Capabilities of Large Language Models in Interactive Code Generationcited by 14
  12. 2025SecRepoBench: Benchmarking Code Agents for Secure Code Completion in Real-World Repositoriescited by 14
5 more
  1. 2026RealSec-bench: A Benchmark for Evaluating Secure Code Generation in Real-World Repositoriescited by 13
  2. 2026HardSecBench: Benchmarking the Security Awareness of LLMs for Hardware Code Generationcited by 5
  3. 2016Assessing and Improving the Mutation Testing Practice of PITcited by 3
  4. 2026Toward Functional and Non-Functional Evaluation of Application-Level Code Generationcited by 2
  5. 2026From Tools to Teacher-Built Teammates: No-Code Pedagogical Plugin Authoring with LearnAdapt Agentic Studio and PedOS 1.1 Luminacited by 2

Built on by

Not cited yet.