{"record_type":"pith_number_record","schema_url":"https://pith.science/schemas/pith-number/v1.json","pith_number":"pith:2025:7A6YGVMEQU627V4TCADJDNAC6Z","short_pith_number":"pith:7A6YGVME","schema_version":"1.0","canonical_sha256":"f83d835584853dafd793100691b402f67beca59554beeb9b2b52bc97ee0fb149","source":{"kind":"arxiv","id":"2501.07058","version":1},"attestation_state":"computed","paper":{"title":"Logic Meets Magic: LLMs Cracking Smart Contract Vulnerabilities","license":"http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/","headline":"","cross_cats":["cs.AI"],"primary_cat":"cs.CR","authors_text":"Hammond Pearce, Qin Wang, Shiping Chen, ZeKe Xiao","submitted_at":"2025-01-13T04:42:45Z","abstract_excerpt":"Smart contract vulnerabilities caused significant economic losses in blockchain applications. Large Language Models (LLMs) provide new possibilities for addressing this time-consuming task. However, state-of-the-art LLM-based detection solutions are often plagued by high false-positive rates.\n  In this paper, we push the boundaries of existing research in two key ways. First, our evaluation is based on Solidity v0.8, offering the most up-to-date insights compared to prior studies that focus on older versions (v0.4). Second, we leverage the latest five LLM models (across companies), ensuring co"},"verification_status":{"content_addressed":true,"pith_receipt":true,"author_attested":false,"weak_author_claims":0,"strong_author_claims":0,"externally_anchored":false,"storage_verified":false,"citation_signatures":0,"replication_records":0,"graph_snapshot":true,"references_resolved":false,"formal_links_present":false},"canonical_record":{"source":{"id":"2501.07058","kind":"arxiv","version":1},"metadata":{"license":"http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/","primary_cat":"cs.CR","submitted_at":"2025-01-13T04:42:45Z","cross_cats_sorted":["cs.AI"],"title_canon_sha256":"39a24ee96ed3e5c40c6471164b142cfadde6f9bfccf577f26250e826636677db","abstract_canon_sha256":"4aa32c1ff2ac26bbefcb63c63acd2e97e58c90131e865e4f8f03861a0251fee0"},"schema_version":"1.0"},"receipt":{"kind":"pith_receipt","key_id":"pith-v1-2026-05","algorithm":"ed25519","signed_at":"2026-07-05T10:00:14.467931Z","signature_b64":"gAmyT2nJkziS3jJYzs7yoZ0Df9gMPcoB85AoLZEDnarGGXA42zVTBsXVu71zGQt7Y03kNOhczbbfHUqS9ZucBA==","signed_message":"canonical_sha256_bytes","builder_version":"pith-number-builder-2026-05-17-v1","receipt_version":"0.3","canonical_sha256":"f83d835584853dafd793100691b402f67beca59554beeb9b2b52bc97ee0fb149","last_reissued_at":"2026-07-05T10:00:14.467401Z","signature_status":"signed_v1","first_computed_at":"2026-07-05T10:00:14.467401Z","public_key_fingerprint":"8d4b5ee74e4693bcd1df2446408b0d54"},"graph_snapshot":{"paper":{"title":"Logic Meets Magic: LLMs Cracking Smart Contract Vulnerabilities","license":"http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/","headline":"","cross_cats":["cs.AI"],"primary_cat":"cs.CR","authors_text":"Hammond Pearce, Qin Wang, Shiping Chen, ZeKe Xiao","submitted_at":"2025-01-13T04:42:45Z","abstract_excerpt":"Smart contract vulnerabilities caused significant economic losses in blockchain applications. Large Language Models (LLMs) provide new possibilities for addressing this time-consuming task. However, state-of-the-art LLM-based detection solutions are often plagued by high false-positive rates.\n  In this paper, we push the boundaries of existing research in two key ways. First, our evaluation is based on Solidity v0.8, offering the most up-to-date insights compared to prior studies that focus on older versions (v0.4). Second, we leverage the latest five LLM models (across companies), ensuring co"},"claims":{"count":0,"items":[],"snapshot_sha256":"258153158e38e3291e3d48162225fcdb2d5a3ed65a07baac614ab91432fd4f57"},"source":{"id":"2501.07058","kind":"arxiv","version":1},"verdict":{"id":null,"model_set":{},"created_at":null,"strongest_claim":"","one_line_summary":"","pipeline_version":null,"weakest_assumption":"","pith_extraction_headline":""},"integrity":{"clean":true,"summary":{"advisory":0,"critical":0,"by_detector":{},"informational":0},"endpoint":"/pith/2501.07058/integrity.json","findings":[],"available":true,"detectors_run":[],"snapshot_sha256":"c28c3603d3b5d939e8dc4c7e95fa8dfce3d595e45f758748cecf8e644a296938"},"references":{"count":0,"sample":[],"resolved_work":0,"snapshot_sha256":"258153158e38e3291e3d48162225fcdb2d5a3ed65a07baac614ab91432fd4f57","internal_anchors":0},"formal_canon":{"evidence_count":0,"snapshot_sha256":"258153158e38e3291e3d48162225fcdb2d5a3ed65a07baac614ab91432fd4f57"},"author_claims":{"count":0,"strong_count":0,"snapshot_sha256":"258153158e38e3291e3d48162225fcdb2d5a3ed65a07baac614ab91432fd4f57"},"builder_version":"pith-number-builder-2026-05-17-v1"},"aliases":[{"alias_kind":"arxiv","alias_value":"2501.07058","created_at":"2026-07-05T10:00:14.467462+00:00"},{"alias_kind":"arxiv_version","alias_value":"2501.07058v1","created_at":"2026-07-05T10:00:14.467462+00:00"},{"alias_kind":"doi","alias_value":"10.48550/arxiv.2501.07058","created_at":"2026-07-05T10:00:14.467462+00:00"},{"alias_kind":"pith_short_12","alias_value":"7A6YGVMEQU62","created_at":"2026-07-05T10:00:14.467462+00:00"},{"alias_kind":"pith_short_16","alias_value":"7A6YGVMEQU627V4T","created_at":"2026-07-05T10:00:14.467462+00:00"},{"alias_kind":"pith_short_8","alias_value":"7A6YGVME","created_at":"2026-07-05T10:00:14.467462+00:00"}],"events":[],"event_summary":{},"paper_claims":[],"inbound_citations":{"count":3,"internal_anchor_count":0,"sample":[{"citing_arxiv_id":"2606.03387","citing_title":"Bastet: A Fine-Grained Expert-Labeled Dataset for DeFi Smart Contract Vulnerability Detection","ref_index":2,"is_internal_anchor":false},{"citing_arxiv_id":"2505.15756","citing_title":"An empirical analysis of vulnerability detection tools for solidity smart contracts","ref_index":40,"is_internal_anchor":false},{"citing_arxiv_id":"2605.11163","citing_title":"Benchmarking LLM-Based Static Analysis for Secure Smart Contract Development: Reliability, Limitations, and Potential Hybrid Solutions","ref_index":30,"is_internal_anchor":false}]},"formal_canon":{"evidence_count":0,"sample":[],"anchors":[]},"links":{"html":"https://pith.science/pith/7A6YGVMEQU627V4TCADJDNAC6Z","json":"https://pith.science/pith/7A6YGVMEQU627V4TCADJDNAC6Z.json","graph_json":"https://pith.science/api/pith-number/7A6YGVMEQU627V4TCADJDNAC6Z/graph.json","events_json":"https://pith.science/api/pith-number/7A6YGVMEQU627V4TCADJDNAC6Z/events.json","paper":"https://pith.science/paper/7A6YGVME"},"agent_actions":{"view_html":"https://pith.science/pith/7A6YGVMEQU627V4TCADJDNAC6Z","download_json":"https://pith.science/pith/7A6YGVMEQU627V4TCADJDNAC6Z.json","view_paper":"https://pith.science/paper/7A6YGVME","resolve_alias":"https://pith.science/api/pith-number/resolve?arxiv=2501.07058&json=true","fetch_graph":"https://pith.science/api/pith-number/7A6YGVMEQU627V4TCADJDNAC6Z/graph.json","fetch_events":"https://pith.science/api/pith-number/7A6YGVMEQU627V4TCADJDNAC6Z/events.json","actions":{"anchor_timestamp":"https://pith.science/pith/7A6YGVMEQU627V4TCADJDNAC6Z/action/timestamp_anchor","attest_storage":"https://pith.science/pith/7A6YGVMEQU627V4TCADJDNAC6Z/action/storage_attestation","attest_author":"https://pith.science/pith/7A6YGVMEQU627V4TCADJDNAC6Z/action/author_attestation","sign_citation":"https://pith.science/pith/7A6YGVMEQU627V4TCADJDNAC6Z/action/citation_signature","submit_replication":"https://pith.science/pith/7A6YGVMEQU627V4TCADJDNAC6Z/action/replication_record"}},"created_at":"2026-07-05T10:00:14.467462+00:00","updated_at":"2026-07-05T10:00:14.467462+00:00"}