Measuring Where Intent Gets Lost in Agentic Smart Contract Synthesis

arXiv cs.AI 约 13 分钟读完

AI agents can now write software from a plain-English description, but code that runs is not the same as code that does what was asked. This gap matters most for smart contracts, the programs behind Web3 applications that move money on a blockchain and cannot be fixed once deployed. We ask how to ch…

Authors: Abhinav Goel , Agostino Capponi , Alfio Gliozzo , Chaitya Shah

View a PDF of the paper titled Measuring Where Intent Gets Lost in Agentic Smart Contract Synthesis, by Abhinav Goel and 3 other authors

View PDF

HTML (experimental)

Abstract: AI agents can now write software from a plain-English description, but code that runs is not the same as code that does what was asked. This gap matters most for smart contracts, the programs behind Web3 applications that move money on a blockchain and cannot be fixed once deployed. We ask how to check whether an AI-written contract behaves as it should, and where the requested behavior gets lost.

We design an evaluation built on execution rather than opinion. We replay the same transactions on an AI-written contract and on the original it should reproduce and measure how often they agree. We test every grading tool on planted mistakes, compare against an answer key written without the description, and audit our own scorer until known wrong answers cannot pass. Common methods, such as AI judges and standard analysis tools, miss obvious mistakes, and scoring choices matter too. Checking only the functions every system includes hid about half the difference between pipelines.

We then propose an elicitation-first architecture. Before writing code, the agent asks the client a short checklist of questions, checks the contract against an independently written executable answer key, and returns disagreements to the client instead of silently rewriting code. Asking first matters far more than reviewing or patching afterwards, across three AI models, while automated security fixes often break requested behavior. A few well-chosen questions recover much of what a short description omits, and their value can be estimated without the original contract. To our knowledge, this is the first study in smart contract synthesis to gather missing requirements before generation and check the result against an independently written executable model. The lessons extend to any setting where AI agents turn requests into programs. We release our tools, 600 tasks and all results.

Comments:

ACM TheWebConf2027 8 pages main content 4 pages appendix

Subjects:

Artificial Intelligence (cs.AI) ; Human-Computer Interaction (cs.HC); Information Retrieval (cs.IR); Multiagent Systems (cs.MA); Software Engineering (cs.SE)

Cite as:

arXiv:2610.37830 [cs.AI]

(or

arXiv:2610.37830v1 [cs.AI] for this version)

https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2610.37830

Focus to learn more

arXiv-issued DOI via DataCite

Submission history

From: Abhinav Goel [ view email ]

[v1]

Tue, 27 Oct 2026 18:43:14 UTC (248 KB)

Full-text links:

Access Paper:

View a PDF of the paper titled Measuring Where Intent Gets Lost in Agentic Smart Contract Synthesis, by Abhinav Goel and 3 other authors

View PDF

HTML (experimental)

TeX Source

view license

Additional Features

Audio Summary

Current browse context:

cs.AI

< prev

next >

new

recent

| 2026-10

Change to browse by:

cs

cs.HC

cs.IR

cs.MA

cs.SE

References & Citations

SciX

Google Scholar

Semantic Scholar

export BibTeX citation

Loading...

BibTeX formatted citation

loading...

Data provided by:

Bookmark

Bibliographic Tools

Bibliographic and Citation Tools

Bibliographic Explorer Toggle

Bibliographic Explorer ( What is the Explorer? )

Connected Papers Toggle

Connected Papers ( What is Connected Papers? )

Litmaps Toggle

Litmaps ( What is Litmaps? )

scite.ai Toggle

scite Smart Citations ( What are Smart Citations? )

Code, Data, Media

Code, Data and Media Associated with this Article

alphaXiv Toggle

alphaXiv ( What is alphaXiv? )

Links to Code Toggle

CatalyzeX Code Finder for Papers ( What is CatalyzeX? )

DagsHub Toggle

DagsHub ( What is DagsHub? )

GotitPub Toggle

Gotit.pub ( What is GotitPub? )

Huggingface Toggle

Hugging Face ( What is Huggingface? )

ScienceCast Toggle

ScienceCast ( What is ScienceCast? )

Demos

Demos

Replicate Toggle

Replicate ( What is Replicate? )

Spaces Toggle

Hugging Face Spaces ( What is Spaces? )

Spaces Toggle

TXYZ.AI ( What is TXYZ.AI? )

Related Papers

Recommenders and Search Tools

Link to Influence Flower

Influence Flower ( What are Influence Flowers? )

Core recommender toggle

CORE Recommender ( What is CORE? )

Author

Venue

Institution

Topic

About arXivLabs

arXivLabs: experimental projects with community collaborators

arXivLabs is a framework that allows collaborators to develop and share new arXiv features directly on our website.

Both individuals and organizations that work with arXivLabs have embraced and accepted our values of openness, community, excellence, and user data privacy. arXiv is committed to these values and only works with partners that adhere to them.

Have an idea for a project that will add value for arXiv's community? Learn more about arXivLabs .

Which authors of this paper are endorsers? |

Disable MathJax ( What is MathJax? )

原文标题 Measuring Where Intent Gets Lost in Agentic Smart Contract Synthesis
引用来源 arXiv cs.AI
本地存档 2026-10-31 12:12
引用格式 Abhinav Goel, Agostino Capponi, Alfio Gliozzo, Chaitya Shah. Measuring Where Intent Gets Lost in Agentic Smart Contract Synthesis. 2026-10-31. https://www.ai007.site/news/83152

本文内容由 ai007 从公开渠道聚合,版权归原作者所有。若原文已删除或变更, 以原文站为准;本站存档仅为便于查阅而保留。