cs.AINov 2, 2026

FORGE: Fault-Oriented Rework Code Generation for Executable Interlocking Assembly

Authors: Fuqiang Wang, Jiahao Fu, Ren Hefeng, Yining Qian, Chuanting Zhang, Cheng Tan, Yuwen Liu, Jingxuan Wei

Organizations: Key Laboratory of Computing Power Network and Information Security, Ministry of Education, Shandong Computer Science Center (National Supercomputer Center in Jinan), Qilu University of Technology (Shandong Academy of Sciences), Jinan 250014, China · Shandong Provincial Key Laboratory of Industrial Network and Information System Security, Shandong Fundamental Research Center for Computer Science, Jinan 250014, China · Quan Cheng Laboratory, Jinan, China · Northeastern University, China · 

Abstract

Large language models have demonstrated strong capabilities in structured reasoning and code generation, yet identifying an assembly fault does not guarantee the ability to generate executable rework programs. In interlocking assemblies, a locally plausible repair program may violate blocking dependencies, omit required recovery operations, or terminate in an incorrect configuration. We identify this challenge as fault-conditioned executable rework generation, where models must jointly reason about structural failures and generate programs that restore constrained assembly states. To benchmark this capability, we introduce FORGE-Bench, containing 4,000 tasks across 26 interlocking assemblies with five assemblies held out for evaluating generalization to unseen structures. We further propose FORGE (Fault-Oriented Rework Code Generation for Executable Interlocking Assembly), a structured state-to-program framework that decomposes rework generation into Rework Structuring and Action Grounding. Rework Structuring captures fault-induced recovery dependencies, while Action Grounding maps these dependencies into state-conditioned executable actions. Experiments show that locally reasonable repair code is insufficient for reliable assembly recovery, and that connecting structural recovery reasoning with executable action realization is essential for verified target restoration.

Figures & tables

Appendix figures & tables6 assets

Supplementary material from the paper’s appendix.

Appendix

Explore similar work

Oct 9, 2026

VIGOR: Verifiable Industrial Geometry Optimization and Repair in Scene Programs

Large language models (LLMs) increasingly generate structured layouts and executable scene programs from natural-language instructions. However, executability does not imply engineering feasibility: an industrial scene program may execute successfully while its final state still violates coupled boundary, collision, clearance, aisle, or structural constraints. We identify this mismatch as the executability-engineering-feasibility gap, where locally plausible placements can remain globally infeasible because corrections to one device may introduce violations elsewhere. To make this gap measurable in a controlled setting, we construct an execution-grounded industrial scene-program dataset with 1,749 constructible scenarios, complete executable programs, and 94 final-state geometric checks per scenario. We further propose VIGOR, which combines supervised scene-program generation with execution-grounded verification and staged geometric refinement. Supervised fine-tuning establishes complete program generation, local projection resolves independently correctable violations, and joint conflict-graph repair coordinates residual multi-object conflicts while preserving structural relations. Experiments show that VIGOR achieves 96.86% Complete Feasibility and an Overall score of 91.20, outperforming the strongest evaluated baseline by 10.42 points in Overall. These results show that, under controlled industrial layout conditions, reliable scene-program generation requires not only executable programs, but also explicit verification and coordinated resolution of coupled engineering constraints.
Nov 2, 2026

MAGAR: Multimodal Agents for GUI-Based 3D Mechanical Assembly and Minimal Rework

A GUI command can be correct at the interface level yet still produce an incorrect assembly. An agent must identify the relevant components, respect their structural relationships, and determine which parts should move during recovery. We introduce MAGAR-Bench, a benchmark of 4,000 multimodal samples from 26 assembly families that separates Assembly Decision, Atomic Action, and Minimal Rework. For rework, the objective counts distinct moved parts within the validated recovery candidate set for each state, rather than the number of actions. We also introduce MAGAR, a selective correction framework built on a frozen policy obtained by supervised fine-tuning. Its key design matches correction granularity to output dependencies. Structured candidates revise assembly fields and rework scope, while complete action candidates keep native GUI primitives coupled with their parameters. A learned selector retains the original prediction unless a candidate passes a task-specific intervention threshold. On recorded states from held-out assembly families, MAGAR improves Overall, the task-balanced aggregate, from 37.50 to 41.39, with gains on all three tasks. Across 209 interventions, 70 correct an error and 22 introduce one. These results support task-specific correction while highlighting the remaining tradeoff between fixing errors and preserving reliable predictions.
Feb 17, 2026

ReLoop: Structured Modeling and Behavioral Verification for Reliable LLM-Based Optimization

Large language models (LLMs) can translate natural-language problem descriptions into optimization code, but the code is prone to silent failures: it executes and returns a solver-feasible solution while encoding a semantically incorrect formulation. On compositional problems, the resulting feasibility-correctness gap reaches 90 percentage points. We introduce ReLoop, which combines two mechanisms. Structured generation decomposes code production into a four-stage reasoning chain (understand, formalize, synthesize, verify) to reduce formulation errors during generation. Behavioral verification detects the errors that remain by testing whether the formulation responds correctly to solver-based parameter perturbation, a signal that comes from the solver rather than from LLM self-review and requires no ground truth. The two mechanisms address different error structures: structured generation gives the largest gain on compositional problems (+8.5pp accuracy on RetailOpt-190 with Claude Opus 4.6), and behavioral verification gives its largest gain on localized defects (+4.4pp on MAMO-ComplexLP). With diagnostic execution recovery, ReLoop reaches 100% executable code on Claude Opus 4.6, and relative to direct generation it raises or preserves every reported metric of the three chat-tuned foundation models on all three benchmarks. For the narrowly fine-tuned SFT model we test, the chain-of-thought prompt conflicts with its learned output format and lowers its accuracy on MAMO-ComplexLP; we document and analyze this interaction. We release RetailOpt-190, 190 compositional retail optimization scenarios in which several constraints interact.