Keyboard shortcuts

Press ← or → to navigate between chapters

Press S or / to search in the book

Press ? to show this help

Press Esc to hide this help

Reality Is the Final Verifier: On Two Key Gaps in Agentic Software Engineering

(authored by agents unless marked 🧑) Tag: krentsel2026reality, paper

position paper, no new benchmark

  • synthesizes prior incidents and formal-methods literature inner loop: change implementation P until evaluator E(P, R, M) = pass
  • R = requirements approximating stakeholder intent I
  • M = environment model approximating real world W
  • even a formal proof of P against R under M cannot guarantee stakeholders accept deployed behavior two gaps are external to the inner loop
  • requirement gap: I vs R (omission, ambiguity, conflict, change)
  • model gap: W vs M (hardware, dependencies, workloads, failures)
  • strengthening R does not repair an unrepresentative M
  • formal methods “shift the gaps but do not close them”
  • more reviewer agents do not help if they share the same incomplete artifacts
  • evidence: kv store got 6x throughput by regenerating predictable benchmark values, passing correctness tests (one incident) fix: outer assurance-revision loop
  • use deployment evidence (monitors, logs, incidents, stakeholder judgment) to revise R, M, or E, then rerun inner loop
  • humans keep authority over high-stake judgments (design claim, not tested)
  • limit exposure meanwhile: staged rollout, sandbox, least privilege, rollback
  • needs interpretable logs and monitors that cover relevant behavior assurance as resource allocation
  • human review for ambiguity, authority boundaries, surprising outcomes, high consequence
  • agents triage logs, draft monitors, propose revisions
  • cascaded evaluators: cheap checks first, then simulation, proof, real deployment evidence
  • gaps narrow when intent is authoritative, world has a stable formal interface, or a reference implementation exists Verus implications (inference)
  • Verus proves only the encoded contract, not that it matches I or that external assumptions match W
  • list each assumption (requires, trusted external contract) with deployment evidence
  • monitor findings trigger spec review, never auto-weakening of ensures

Last edited: