Automatic Harness Evolution for Hardware Design Verification: Can LLMs Consolidate Gains Across Discovered Harnesses?
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Agent behavior depends on the harness surrounding a language model, but it remains unclear whether language models can reliably improve such harnesses for hardware-design tasks. We study automatic harness evolution around a fixed subject model on 12 proprietary design-verification root-cause localization tasks. Across five trials per task, automatically evolved harnesses increased completed attempts by 71-76% and any-hit task coverage by 80-100%, while total correct attempts improved by only 18-24%. The strongest success reproducible at least twice result improved by one task, and later candidates exchanged gains across tasks rather than preserving them. An auxiliary candidate improved on a four-task validation set excluded from search but tied its baseline on a subsequent 12-task replay containing both search and validation tasks, so the selected gain did not persist across the full pool. Across the tested lineage, useful search, evidence, and finalization behaviors appeared in different candidates but did not consistently consolidate into a single harness that dominated across tasks and metrics. In a separate CVDP cross-benchmark case study, an automatically evolved defined-width repair harness produced 35.6% more functional passes than its 142-task reference baseline; the final functional verifier scored completed outputs but was not shown to the subject agent during repair. These results support archive-aware selection when evolution yields complementary specializations without consistent consolidation.
Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 15 of its 20 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 24 Sep 2026.
Builds on
15 of 20 references.
References · 15
- 2023DSPy: Compiling Declarative Language Model Calls into Self-Improving Pipelinescited by 803
- 2025GEPA: Reflective Prompt Evolution Can Outperform Reinforcement Learningcited by 449
- 2024AFlow: Automating Agentic Workflow Generationcited by 395
- 2024Automated Design of Agentic Systemscited by 360
- 2026Meta-Harness: End-to-End Optimization of Model Harnessescited by 248
- 2023ChipNeMo: Domain-Adapted LLMs for Chip Designcited by 168
- 2026Self-Harness: Harnesses That Improve Themselvescited by 79
- 2024Revisiting VerilogEval: A Year of Improvements in Large-Language Models for Hardware Code Generationcited by 45
- 2025Comprehensive Verilog Design Problems: A Next-Generation Benchmark Dataset for Evaluating Large Language Models and Agents on RTL Design and Verificationcited by 41
- 2026Rethinking the Evaluation of Harness Evolution for Agentscited by 39
- 2026Stop Comparing LLM Agents Without Disclosing the Harnesscited by 25
- 2026Recursive Harness Self-Improvementcited by 22
3 more
Built on by
Not cited yet.