Reality Is the Final Verifier: On Two Key Gaps in Agentic Software Engineering
On the map: LLM agents and tool use → Software engineering coding agents
Abstract (arXiv)
Software development follows an implementation-verification loop in which developers or agents iteratively revise an implementation until an evaluator, such as a test suite, accepts it. The evaluator checks the implementation against a set of requirements under a model of the deployment environment. Yet even a formal proof that the implementation satisfies the requirements under the model cannot guarantee acceptable behavior after deployment. Requirements only approximate stakeholder intent, and the model only approximates the real deployment environment. We call these together - requirement gap and model gap - the two-gap framework, which unifies the main failure modes of agentic software engineer-ing: reward hacking exploits omissions in the requirements or model, while hallucination widens the gaps by fabricating requirements or environment assumptions. Because neither gap can generally be certified closed in an open, changing world, the goal shifts from closing them to continuously narrowing them. We therefore propose an assurance-revision loop that uses deployment evidence to revise the requirements, model, or evaluator when stakeholders reject the resulting behavior. We then cast assured agentic development as a resource-allocation problem over human judgment, agent capability, and compute. The two principal bottlenecks mirror the two gaps: human judgment for the requirement gap and faithful, costly evaluation for the model gap. Reality remains the final verifier: acceptable behavior under actual deployment conditions is the ultimate test, while predeployment evaluations remain proxies for it.
Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 7 Oct 2026). Placed in Software engineering coding agents, one of 16 directions in LLM agents and tool use. Builds on 25 of its 123 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 10 Sep 2026.
Builds on
25 of 123 references.
Closest ancestors · 1
Same direction, newest first
- 2025Why Do Multi-Agent LLM Systems Fail?17 Mar
Other references · 24
- 2023SWE-bench: Can Language Models Resolve Real-World GitHub Issues?cited by 3,193
- 2016A Baseline for Detecting Misclassified and Out-of-Distribution Examples in Neural Networkscited by 2,362
- 2016Concrete Problems in AI Safetycited by 1,582
- 2018World Modelscited by 1,444
- 2018Continual Lifelong Learning with Neural Networks: A Reviewcited by 1,313
- 2023Mastering Diverse Domains through World Modelscited by 1,193
- 2025Cosmos World Foundation Model Platform for Physical AIcited by 833
- 2023ExpeL: LLM Agents Are Experiential Learnerscited by 814
- 2016Hyperband: A Novel Bandit-Based Approach to Hyperparameter Optimizationcited by 688
- 2025DeepSeek-Prover-V2: Advancing Formal Mathematical Reasoning via Reinforcement Learning for Subgoal Decompositioncited by 270
- 2020Consistent Estimators for Learning to Defer to an Expertcited by 262
- 2014Preserving Statistical Validity in Adaptive Data Analysiscited by 102
12 more
- 2025How Memory Management Impacts LLM Agents: An Empirical Study of Experience-Following Behaviorcited by 95
- 2024Feedback Loops With Language Models Drive In-Context Reward Hackingcited by 70
- 2015The Ladder: A Reliable Leaderboard for Machine Learning Competitionscited by 67
- 2018The Art, Science, and Engineering of Fuzzing: A Surveycited by 61
- 2024We Have a Package for You! A Comprehensive Analysis of Package Hallucinations by Code Generating LLMscited by 61
- 2018Incomplete Contracting and AI Alignmentcited by 60
- 2025Are "Solved Issues" in SWE-bench Really Solved Correctly? An Empirical Studycited by 47
- 2017Chaos Engineeringcited by 18
- 2024Specifications: The missing link to making the development of LLM systems an engineering disciplinecited by 17
- 2017Engineering Trustworthy Self-Adaptive Software with Dynamic Assurance Casescited by 14
- 2019Perpetual Assurances for Self-Adaptive Systemscited by 9
- 2026Inductive Deductive Synthesis: Enabling AI to Generate Formally Verified Systemscited by 3
Built on by
Not cited yet.
Similar, not cited
Close in wording, no citation either way
- 2026Rethinking Software Engineering for Agentic AI Systems
- 2025The Software Engineering Simulations Lab: Agentic AI for RE Quality Simulations
- 2025From Correctness to Collaboration: Toward a Human-Centered Framework for Evaluating AI Agent Behavior in Software Engineering
- 2026Human oversight of agentic systems in practice: Examining the oversight work, challenges, and heuristics of developers using software agents
- 2026Agentic Software: How AI Agents Are Restructuring the Software Paradigm
- 2026Assistance to Autonomy: A Systematic Literature Review of Agentic AI across the Software Development Life Cycle
- 2025Agentic Software Engineering: Foundational Pillars and a Research Roadmap
- 2026From Traceability to Justifiability: Accountability Structures in Agentic Software Engineering