It is shown that functional correctness alone is insufficient to assess the operational reliability of LLM-generated software before deployment in continuously running environments, and that memory usage is the most consistent indicator of potential software aging.
Abstract
Large Language Models (LLMs) are increasingly used to generate executable software systems from natural language specifications, accelerating development and reducing manual implementation effort. Although recent studies have investigated the functional correctness, security, maintainability, and robustness of LLM-generated code, little is known about the long-term reliability of such systems under sustained execution. In this paper, we experimentally investigate software aging symptoms in LLM-generated service-based applications across generation-and-execution environments. Using backend scenarios derived from BaxBench, we generated applications targeting JavaScript, Python, and Rust through LLM-based generation platforms, validated them with BaxBench-derived tests, and subjected them to 48-hour workload executions. We monitored memory usage, response time, and throughput and analyzed them using the Mann--Kendall test and Sen's slope estimator. We further complemented the runtime evaluation with static analysis of the generated source code and an exploratory comparison with human-written implementations of related backend scenarios. The results show that memory usage is the most consistent indicator of potential software aging, with statistically significant upward trends in most application-environment combinations, while response time and throughput exhibit more heterogeneous behavior. Static analysis identified plausible code-level aging mechanisms, and the comparison with human-written systems showed that the aging symptoms observed in LLM-generated applications align with degradation patterns also found in manually developed implementations. These findings indicate that functional correctness alone is insufficient to assess the operational reliability of LLM-generated software before deployment in continuously running environments.
This paper investigates how programming language standards influence memory safety by analyzing three distinct approaches: the manual memory management of C++, the ownership-based compile-time model of Rust, and the automatic garbage collection of Python.
Gordon Bednarz, Ludvig Kåhlin, Oliver Andersson· 0 citations
A security assessment on 75 FastAPI backends generated by three contemporary LLMs revealed a disconnect between functional correctness and secure logic, which is interpreted as a review-risk pattern, which is called the human-in-the-loop paradox.
Abdul Ali Khan, S. Rauti, T. Mäkilä· IEEE Access· 0 citations
The results show that executable feedback can repair secure-code generation, but its benefits depend on the model, task, feedback entry point, and especially test coverage.
Yun-Hao Liang, Cheng-Guang Gan, Rui-Xuan Ying et al.· 2 citations
This research investigates Large Language Models (LLMs), which are considered among the most performant AI models to date, for the CVD task, and high-light the importance of tuning to resolve the task, the performance of Double tuning, as well as the potential of Llama models for CVD.
It is argued that compile rate is a scientifically unreliable metric for single-function vulnerability repair, and this is supported with five controlled experiments over 203 vulnerable functions from Big-Vul, three open-source code LLMs (350M to 6.7B parameters), and three prompting strategies.
Om Nepal, Sushant Aryal, Oluseyi Olukola et al.· 0 citations
SWE-Flux is introduced, a repository-level benchmark for dynamic execution reasoning containing 480 execution-grounded instances across 12 real Python repositories, with gold answers automatically harvested from instrumented test executions rather than written manually or judged by LLMs.
Hamed Taherkhani, Mohammad Abdollahi, Melika Sepidband et al.· 0 citations
We use cookies to run the site and, with your consent, for analytics and to show ads.
See our Cookie Policy.