RTLCurator is presented, which learns a behavior-aware compatibility prior by contrasting each specification with implementations that fail simulation, and calibrates it to a new corpus using a small number of validated pairs, and constructs the retained subset by balancing alignment, representation coverage, and RTL structural richness.
Abstract
Training large language models (LLMs) to write register-transfer level (RTL) requires large corpora of paired specifications and code, and such data is scarce enough that most public corpora are now synthesized. Synthesis provides scale but not correctness, and in two widely used RTL datasets only 24.4% and 53.5% of pairs pass generated functional tests. This raises the question of how much of such a corpus to keep and which part of it. Correctness alone is a poor answer. A pair that misbehaves in one corner case still shows valid syntax and interface conventions, and complex sequential designs are both harder to generate and harder to validate, so filtering by correctness leaves a corpus of short and simple modules. Correctness is also hard to obtain, since behavior leaves little trace on the surface in RTL, and validating an entire corpus only sorts pairs into passed and failed. We present RTLCurator, which learns a behavior-aware compatibility prior by contrasting each specification with implementations that fail simulation, and calibrates it to a new corpus using a small number of validated pairs. It then constructs the retained subset by balancing alignment, representation coverage, and RTL structural richness. On CodeV and RTLCoder, keeping 80% of the corpus this way improves on training with the full corpus across all reported metrics while validating only 10% of the pool, whereas ranking by the score alone falls below random selection and filtering the whole pool by simulation does no better.
NoTB is introduced, an oracle-free triage framework that infers correctness from cross-model formal consensus and demonstrates that formal cross-model agreement provides a reliable basis for high-confidence triage without model-dependent oracles.
Elisavet Lydia Alvanaki, Je Yang, Biruk B. Seyoum et al.· 0 citations
VeriRefine progressively refines the prose specification into an explicit, schema-constrained account of design intent, expressed as per-signal Abstract Signal Transition Functions (ASTFs) that commit each signal's logic style, clock domain, and reset behavior before any code exists and ground every behavior in a verbatim specification sentence.
This study discloses the model efficiency for different tasks, causes of failed fs tasks, and techniques for mitigating LLM failures, and will open source \phi-Bench to facilitate public research on using LLMs for fs development.
A reproducible, license-aware knowledge-distillation recipe addressing the constraint of deploying a safety layer for large language models on commodity hardware by partitioning the corpus into seven safety categories aligned to a public hazard taxonomy.
Edson Rodrigues da Cruz Filho, Paulo Ricardo Ferreira Neves, P. H. Falsetti et al.· 0 citations
Running fully local without cloud data transmission, this pipeline offers a privacy-safe lightweight solution for SysML PlantUML modeling and does not support SysML-exclusive requirement or parametric diagrams.
Bao-Ran An, Tao Lei, Guangtai Tian· Italian National Conference...· 0 citations
As Large Language Models (LLMs) lower the barrier for au- tomated content generation, the potential for producing hate speech poses a significant challenge for digital safety. This paper presents a reproducibility study of the HateBench paper by Shen et al., investigating whether existing hate speech detectors, typically trained on human-authored data, generalize to LLM-generated hateful content, and evaluating whether their reported weaknesses are stable over time and robust to evolving components. We independently reconstruct the original dataset genera- tion pipeline using modern LLMs and extend the benchmark to include recently released models and updated detector versions. Our independent assessment under current con- ditions finds that for newer LLMs, safeguards have been put into place to prevent the generation of harmful content. We also replicate the results for two sophisticated types of hate campaigns. While the original findings seem to have been overestimated slightly due to bias in the datasets, the overall findings can be confirmed. Finally, we compare text- Moderation against the newer omni-Moderation and find that its robustness against adversarial hate campaigns has improved slightly. By clarifying which detector vulnerabil- ities persist, this study informs the community about the longevity of content moderation measurements.
Unknown authors· 0 citations
We use cookies to run the site and, with your consent, for analytics and to show ads.
See our Cookie Policy.