Neuro-Symbolic Generation and Validation of Memory-Aware Formal Function Specifications

Formal specification is essential for rigorous program verification, yet writing correct specifications remains costly and difficult to automate. Although large language models (LLMs) and agents have shown promising progress, their true capabilities and failure modes remain unclear. We present the first systematic and contamination-aware study of LLM- and agent-based formal specification generation for C programs. We introduce LiveFMBench, a continuously evolving benchmark of 630 ACSL (ANSI/ISO C Specification Language)-annotated C programs, including 360 newly collected cases designed to mitigate data leakage. Using this benchmark, we evaluate direct prompting with different sampling sizes, reasoning-enabled (thinking mode) inference, the agentic pipeline, and perform a fine-grained failure analysis. Experimental results reveal that naive evaluation substantially overestimates performance because models under direct prompting may exhibit unfaithful behaviors, such as deceiving automated provers or ignoring code-context constraints; after excluding such cases, the true specification generation accuracy drops by approximately 20%. We further find that both increased sampling and thinking mode significantly improve success rates, with smaller models benefiting more from thinking mode. Agentic pipelines are particularly effective under low sampling budgets and on harder datasets. Failure analysis further shows that incorrect loop invariants are the dominant error type, while agentic pipelines notably reduce assertion errors. These results expose fundamental limitations in current LLM-based approaches and suggest they remain far from replacing human-authored formal specifications. We release LiveFMBench at https://huggingface.co/datasets/fm-universe/Live-FM-Bench and all evaluation artifacts to support future research.

Memory safety errors account for a large proportion of security bugs in systems written in C; modern languages such as Java and Rust prevent such bugs because they are memory-safe by design. To migrate systems to safer languages or identify memory errors, we must first determine how legacy code manipulates memory. This information is only represented implicitly in such code. In many cases, memory usage patterns are merely tedious for humans to figure out, rather than truly difficult. In this work, we ask if large language models (LLMs) can perform this task by having them synthesize annotations representing memory usage as specifications in CN, a hybrid testing/verification tool. Our tool, CNnotator, uses LLMs to automatically generate and test CN specifications. We find that current models are able to generate CN specifications for small-to-medium C programs, with the OpenAI o3 reasoning model achieving a 90% success rate on first attempts and 97% overall success, while the chat model GPT-4o correctly annotates 65% of first attempts. These results suggest AI-assisted annotation is becoming practical for real-world C codebases.

Generating formal specifications for C programs remains a challenge in formal verification due to the manual effort, expertise, and semantic precision required. While recent advancements in large language models (LLMs) offer promise in automating specification synthesis, current approaches often lack semantic depth and produce unverifiable or incomplete contracts. To address these limitations, we introduce AutoACSL, a novel framework that integrates LLM prompting with semantic features extracted from Code Property Graphs (CPGs). AutoACSL performs static analyses to extract key semantic elements, including arithmetic operations, loop and recursion structures, and return value propagation, which are encoded into structured prompts. These prompts enable the LLM not only to generate normal behavioral specifications but also to include constraints that prevent inputs leading to runtime errors. AutoACSL employs a feedback-driven synthesis loop, where candidate specifications are verified using Frama-C/WP and refined iteratively until verification succeeds or a termination condition is met. Evaluated on 604 programs drawn from diverse datasets, AutoACSL achieves a 98% specification generation success ratio and a 96% full proof ratio when paired with Gemini-3. Compared to a code-only baseline, AutoACSL improves the full proof ratio by 24.7% to 51.7% across four LLMs (GPT-o4 Mini, GPT-5.2, Grok-4.1, and Gemini-3), demonstrating that integrating large language models with CPG-based static analysis substantially enhances both generation robustness and verification effectiveness for automated ACSL specification synthesis.