Pith. sign in

REVIEW 5 cited by

What I cannot execute, I do not understand: Training and Evaluating LLMs on Program Execution Traces

Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.

SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event

T0 review · schema-true

One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.

pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp

arxiv 2503.05703 v1 pith:CIPBBFZ4 submitted 2025-02-10 cs.LG cs.AIcs.PL

What I cannot execute, I do not understand: Training and Evaluating LLMs on Program Execution Traces

classification cs.LG cs.AIcs.PL
keywords executioncodellmscomputationsdynamicmodelmodelsprogram
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved
0 comments
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN
read the original abstract

Code generation and understanding are critical capabilities for large language models (LLMs). Thus, most LLMs are pretrained and fine-tuned on code data. However, these datasets typically treat code as static strings and rarely exploit the dynamic information about their execution. Building upon previous work on trace modeling, we study Execution Tuning (E.T.), a training procedure in which we explicitly model real-world program execution traces without requiring manual test annotations. We train and evaluate models on different execution trace granularities (line and instruction-level) and strategies on the task of output prediction, obtaining around 80% accuracy on CruxEval and MBPP, and showing the advantages of dynamic scratchpads (i.e., self-contained intermediate computations updated by the model rather than accumulated as a history of past computations) on long executions (up to 14k steps). Finally, we discuss E.T.'s practical applications.

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Forward citations

Cited by 5 Pith papers

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score.

  1. Teaching LLMs Program Semantics via Symbolic Execution Traces

    cs.SE 2026-05 unverdicted novelty 6.0

    Training Qwen3-8B on symbolic execution traces from Soteria improves violation detection in C programs by over 17 points, transfers across five property types, and shows superadditive gains with chain-of-thought.

  2. Generating Verifiable Chain of Thoughts from Exection-Traces

    cs.SE 2025-11 unverdicted novelty 6.0

    A pipeline produces 54,000 execution-trace-verified bi-directional Chain-of-Thought rationales for code, and fine-tuning on them yields gains up to 26.6 points on LiveCodeBench-Exec and similar benchmarks.

  3. Can Large Language Models Reason About Complex Execution Paths? An Empirical Study on Python

    cs.SE 2025-11 conditional novelty 6.0

    State-of-the-art LLMs solve over 60% of complex Python path constraints in test generation, but their path classification is unreliable, especially for infeasible paths.

  4. Execution-First Synthetic Tool-Use Trace Generation for LLM Agents

    cs.SE 2026-07 conditional novelty 5.0

    An execution-first data generator that validates tool traces before synthesizing user tasks improves Qwen agents' tool use and answer quality, with masked reasoning supervision beating full-trace supervision.

  5. Code as Agent Harness

    cs.CL 2026-05 accept novelty 5.0

    A survey that organizes existing work on LLM-based agents around code as the central harness, structured in three layers of interfaces, mechanisms, and multi-agent scaling, with applications across domains and listed ...