Vibe Compiler: A Research-Logic Synthesis Tool That Runs without Prompt Engineering -Toward Enhancing Metacognition for Sustaining Agency in the Age of Generative AI-
The Vibe Compiler is presented, a research-logic compiler that helps researchers turn vague intuitions into coherent research logic and implements the type in which the AI probes its own synthesized output, itself driven by the user's Vibes, and thereby stimulates human metacognition.
Abstract
Used as a capable servant, generative AI has greatly accelerated intellectual work, yet it also risks eroding human epistemic agency by encouraging uncritical acceptance of AI-generated reasoning. Preserving that agency calls for mechanisms that augment human metacognition during AI-assisted work. We therefore propose the Synthesis-Analysis Reciprocity Model, which views intellectual construction as a reciprocal interaction between two cognitive functions. Synthesis selects and combines the components of the artifact; Analysis evaluates them critically against objective indicators and constrains the Synthesis that follows. Grounded in this model, we present the Vibe Compiler, a research-logic compiler that helps researchers turn vague intuitions (Vibes) into coherent research logic. The system attempts to compile those intuitions against a paper ontology of 16 academic parameters. It treats compilation failures as signs that logical components are missing. Rather than fill those gaps autonomously, it returns reflective questions that prompt researchers to develop the missing reasoning themselves. We further characterize the origins of structural gaps along two orthogonal dimensions: cognitive function (Synthesis versus Analysis) and executing agent (human versus AI). The four resulting types of origin give a principled way to identify where breakdowns in intellectual construction arise. Crucially, our design implements the type in which the AI probes its own synthesized output, itself driven by the user's Vibes, and thereby stimulates human metacognition. This choice raises researchers from passive"Makers"of the output into"Managers"who critically direct and validate what the AI produces. In a prototype on NotebookLM and Gemini, AI behavior depended less on prompting than on the structure of the knowledge supplied. The framework spans a learner layer and a researcher layer.
An anecdotal account of AI agents, equipped with a CLI and a proof assistant, producing thousands of lines of machine-checked code, and the role of the human expert, whose contribution reduces to providing natural-language problem descriptions, reviewing auto-generated specifications, and occasionally supplying a key i...
Eleftherios Ioannidis, Nikhil Swamy, Gabriel Ebner et al.· Proc. ACM Program. Lang.· 1 citation
A paired ablation that removes explicit scientific guidance while preserving the repository and executable engineering context shows that scientific knowledge is not uniformly beneficial: well-grounded information can constrain repair and improve average performance and token efficiency, whereas poorly aligned guidance...
Zhi-Peng Xu, Jia-Hao Lu, Yi-Ning Zheng et al.· 4 citations
Large language models (LLMs) have demonstrated great potential in code reasoning tasks, but their reasoning processes lack reliable verification mechanisms, making it difficult to ensure logical correctness. The Tree of Thoughts (ToT) framework improves reasoning by exploring multiple paths and employing backtracking,...
Hao-Liang Cheng, En-Yi Tang, Shuo-Xiao Zhang et al.· Proceedings of the ACM on So...· 0 citations
This case study presents IF: CARGO, an experimental puzzle game that uses a large language model as a semantic compiler rather than an autonomous game-playing agent. Players author IF/THEN rules in natural language, which the model translates into a constrained command schema for deterministic validation and execution...
T. Hsu, Lian-Ye Zhang, Jiang-Xu Lin et al.· 0 citations
Large language models are increasingly used as collaborators on deductive-reasoning tasks, but their outputs can hallucinate or pull users away from intended reasoning. Formal proof assistants provide machine-checked verification, but have a steep learning curve and require more granular reasoning than human written pr...
Chen-Jun Guo, Manooshree Patel, Arnav Mehta et al.· 0 citations
SA-Pass (*Semantic Alignment Pass*), which tests formal statements using auxiliary statements called shadows that characterize the intended statement, is proposed, which achieves binary agreement with expert judgments.
Hojae Han, Jongyoon Kim, Sanghyeok Park et al.· 2 citations
We use cookies to run the site and, with your consent, for analytics and to show ads.
See our Cookie Policy.