LLMs show promise in code generation, yet their effectiveness for IT automation tasks, particularly for tools like Ansible, remains understudied. Existing benchmarks rely primarily on synthetic tasks that fail to capture the needs of practitioners who use IT automation tools. We present ExITBench (Execution-based IT Automation Benchmark), a benchmark of 126 diverse tasks (e.g., configuring servers and managing files) in which each task captures state reconciliation - a core property of IT automation tools. ExITBench evaluates LLMs’ ability to generate functional Ansible automation scripts via dynamic execution in controlled environments. We evaluate 14 open-source and 3 proprietary LLMs and find that GPT-4.1-Mini achieves the best pass@10 rate of 23.9%, while Claude-3.5-Sonnet achieves the best pass@1 performance. To explain the low performance, we analyze 1,517 execution failures across the evaluated LLMs and identify two prevalent semantic error categories: failures in state-reconciliation reasoning (42.117% combined from variable (12.287%), host (10.363%), path (10.511%), and template (8.956%) issues) and deficiencies in module-specific execution knowledge (26.203% combined from attribute & parameter (17.617%) and module (8.586%) errors). Our findings reveal key limitations in LLMs’ ability to address state reconciliation and apply specialized module knowledge, indicating that reliable IT automation with LLM-based agents need major advances in state reasoning and domain-specific execution.

Large language models (LLMs) have shown remarkable capabilities across diverse coding tasks. However, their adoption requires a true understanding of program execution rather than relying on surface-level patterns. Existing benchmarks primarily focus on predicting program properties tied to specific inputs (e.g., code coverage, program outputs). As a result, they provide a narrow view of dynamic code reasoning and are prone to data contamination. We argue that understanding program execution requires evaluating its inherent duality through two complementary reasoning tasks: (i) predicting a program’s observed behavior for a given input, and (ii) inferring how the input must be mutated toward a specific behavioral objective. Both tasks jointly probe a model’s causal understanding of execution flow. We instantiate this duality in DexBench, a benchmark comprising 445 paired instances, and evaluate 13 LLMs. Our results demonstrate that dual-path reasoning provides a robust and discriminative proxy for dynamic code understanding.

One of the most important yet onerous tasks in the academic peer-reviewing process is composing meta-reviews, which involves assimilating diverse opinions from multiple expert peers, formulating one’s self-judgment as a senior expert, and then summarizing all these perspectives into a concise holistic overview to make an overall recommendation. This process is time-consuming and can be compromised by human factors like fatigue, inconsistency, missing tiny details, etc. Given the latest major developments in Large Language Models (LLMs), it is very compelling to rigorously study whether LLMs can help meta-reviewers perform this important task better. In this paper, we perform a case study with three popular LLMs, i.e., GPT-3.5, LLaMA2, and PaLM2, to assist meta-reviewers in better comprehending multiple experts’ perspectives by generating a controlled multi-perspective-summary (MPS) of their opinions. To achieve this, we prompt three LLMs with different types/levels of prompts based on the recently proposed TELeR taxonomy. Finally, we perform a detailed qualitative study of the MPSs generated by the LLMs and report our findings.

As we begin to see low-powered computing paradigms (Neuromorphic Computing, Spiking Neural Networks, etc.) becoming more popular, learning binary word embeddings has become increasingly important for supporting NLP applications at the edge. Existing binary word embeddings are mostly derived from pretrained real-valued embeddings through different simple transformations, which often break the semantic consistency and the so-called “arithmetic” properties learned by the original, real-valued embeddings. This paper aims to address this limitation by introducing a new approach to learn binary embeddings from scratch, preserving the semantic relationships between words as well as the arithmetic properties of the embeddings themselves. To achieve this, we propose a novel genetic algorithm to learn the relationships between words from existing word analogy data-sets, carefully making sure that the arithmetic properties of the relationships are preserved. Evaluating our generated 16, 32, and 64-bit binary word embeddings on Mikolov’s word analogy task shows that more than 95% of the time, the best fit for the analogy is ranked in the top 5 most similar words in terms of cosine similarity.