Large Language Model Powered Symbolic Execution
Yihe Li, Ruijie Meng, Gregory J. Duck
Abstract
Large Language Models (LLMs) have emerged as a promising alternative to traditional static program analysis methods, such as symbolic execution, offering the ability to reason over code directly without relying on theorem provers or SMT solvers. However, LLMs are also inherently approximate by nature, and therefore face significant challenges in relation to the accuracy and scale of analysis in real-world applications. Such issues often necessitate the use of larger LLMs with higher token limits, but this requires enterprise-grade hardware (GPUs) and thus limits accessibility for many users. In this paper, we propose LLM-based symbolic execution-a novel approach that enhances LLM inference via a path-based decomposition of the program analysis tasks into smaller (more tractable) subtasks. The core idea is to generalize path constraints using a generic code-based representation that the LLM can directly reason over, and without translation into another (less-expressive) formal language. We implement our approach in the form of AutoBug, an LLM-based symbolic execution engine that is lightweight and language-agnostic, making it a practical tool for analyzing code that is challenging for traditional approaches. We show that AutoBug can improve both the accuracy and scale of LLM-based program analysis, especially for smaller LLMs that can run on consumer-grade hardware.
• Computing methodologies → Knowledge representation and reasoning.
Ask about this paper
Your agent reads all of it.
Lune indexed this paper to the last equation, along with the top-tier papers that cite it. Ask a question and the answer quotes them.
Your agent calls
Luneget_paper_fulltext
Free to start. No credit card required.
Terminal
Install the CLIlune papers fulltext a5b76c10-4c2a-499e-879d-8b17fd1e0f1bCited by top-tier papers3
- Cottontail: Large Language Model-Driven Concolic Execution for Highly Structured Test Input GenerationHaoxin Tu, Seongmin Lee, Yuxian Li, Peng Chen et al.S&P 2026 · 22 citations
- Defusing Logic Bombs in Symbolic Execution with LLM-Generated Ghost CodeDimitrios Stamatios Bouras, Sergey MechtaevISSTA 2026
- PBFuzz: Agentic Directed Fuzzing for PoV GenerationHaochen Zeng, Andrew Bao, Jiajun Cheng, Chengyu SongCCS 2026
Builds on9
- SOK: (State of) The Art of War: Offensive Techniques in Binary AnalysisYan Shoshitaishvili, Ruoyu Wang, Christopher Salls, Nick Stephens et al.S&P 2016 · 1,085 citations
- Automated Program Repair in the Era of Large Pre-trained Language ModelsChunqiu Steven Xia, Yuxiang Wei, Lingming ZhangICSE 2023 · 321 citations
- Automated Repair of Programs from Large Language ModelsZhiyu Fan, Xiang Gao, Martin Mirchev, Abhik Roychoudhury et al.ICSE 2023 · 213 citations
- Large Language Models for Code Analysis: Do LLMs Really Do Their Job?Chongzhou Fang, Ning Miao, Shaurya Srivastav, Jialin Liu et al.USENIX Security 2024 · 110 citations
- Same Task, More Tokens: the Impact of Input Length on the Reasoning Performance of Large Language ModelsMosh Levy, Alon Jacoby, Yoav GoldbergACL 2024 · 77 citations
Related papers
- NESA: Relational Neuro-Symbolic Static Program AnalysisChengpeng Wang, Yifei Gao, Wuqi Zhang, Xuwei Liu et al.FSE 2026 · 1 citation
- NL-Debugging: Exploiting Natural Language as an Intermediate Representation for Code DebuggingWeiming Zhang, Qingyao Li, Xinyi Dai, Jizheng Chen et al.EMNLP 2025 · 1 citation
- Large Language Models Are Neurosymbolic ReasonersMeng Fang, Shilong Deng, Yudi Zhang, Zijing Shi et al.AAAI 2024 · 53 citations
- Agentic Concolic ExecutionZhengxiong Luo, Huan Zhao, Dylan Wolff, Cristian Cadar et al.S&P 2026 · 17 citations
- LLM Assistance for Memory SafetyJ. Nausheen Mohammed, Akash Lal, Aseem Rastogi, Rahul Sharma et al.ICSE 2025 · 4 citations
