Skip to content
← Back to explorer

COEVO: Co-Evolutionary Framework for Joint Functional Correctness and PPA Optimization in LLM-Based RTL Generation

Heng Ping, Peiyu Zhang, Shixuan Li, Wei Yang, Anzhe Cheng, Shukai Duan, Xiaole Zhang, Paul Bogdan · Apr 16, 2026 · Citations: 0

How to use this page

Provisional trust

This page is a lightweight research summary built from the abstract and metadata while deeper extraction catches up.

Best use

Background context only

What to verify

Read the full paper before copying any benchmark, metric, or protocol choices.

Evidence quality

Provisional

Derived from abstract and metadata only.

Abstract

LLM-based RTL code generation methods increasingly target both functional correctness and PPA quality, yet existing approaches universally decouple the two objectives, optimizing PPA only after correctness is fully achieved. Whether through sequential multi-agent pipelines, evolutionary search with binary correctness gates, or hierarchical reward dependencies, partially correct but architecturally promising candidates are systematically discarded. Moreover, existing methods reduce the multi-objective PPA space to a single scalar fitness, obscuring the trade-offs among area, delay, and power. To address these limitations, we propose COEVO, a co-evolutionary framework that unifies correctness and PPA optimization within a single evolutionary loop. COEVO formulates correctness as a continuous co-optimization dimension alongside area, delay, and power, enabled by an enhanced testbench that provides fine-grained scoring and detailed diagnostic feedback. An adaptive correctness gate with annealing allows PPA-promising but partially correct candidates to guide the search toward jointly optimal solutions. To preserve the full PPA trade-off structure, COEVO employs four-dimensional Pareto-based non-dominated sorting with configurable intra-level sorting, replacing scalar fitness without manual weight tuning. Evaluated on VerilogEval 2.0 and RTLLM 2.0, COEVO achieves 97.5\% and 94.5\% Pass@1 with GPT-5.4-mini, surpassing all agentic baselines across four LLM backbones, while attaining the best PPA on 43 out of 49 synthesizable RTLLM designs.

Abstract-only analysis — low confidence

All signals on this page are inferred from the abstract only and may be inaccurate. Do not use this page as a primary protocol reference.

  • This page is still relying on abstract and metadata signals, not a fuller protocol read.

Should You Rely On This Paper?

Signal extraction is still processing. This page currently shows metadata-first guidance until structured protocol fields are ready.

Best use

Background context only

Use if you need

A provisional background reference while structured extraction finishes.

Main weakness

This page is still relying on abstract and metadata signals, not a fuller protocol read.

Trust level

Provisional

Usefulness score

Unavailable

Eval-fit score is unavailable until extraction completes.

Human Feedback Signal

Not explicit in abstract metadata

Evaluation Signal

Weak / implicit signal

Usefulness for eval research

Provisional (processing)

Extraction confidence 0%

What We Could Verify

These are the protocol signals we could actually recover from the available paper metadata. Use them to decide whether this paper is worth deeper reading.

Human Feedback Types

provisional (inferred)

None explicit

No explicit feedback protocol extracted.

"LLM-based RTL code generation methods increasingly target both functional correctness and PPA quality, yet existing approaches universally decouple the two objectives, optimizing PPA only after correctness is fully achieved."

Evaluation Modes

provisional (inferred)

None explicit

Validate eval design from full paper text.

"LLM-based RTL code generation methods increasingly target both functional correctness and PPA quality, yet existing approaches universally decouple the two objectives, optimizing PPA only after correctness is fully achieved."

Quality Controls

provisional (inferred)

Not reported

No explicit QC controls found.

"LLM-based RTL code generation methods increasingly target both functional correctness and PPA quality, yet existing approaches universally decouple the two objectives, optimizing PPA only after correctness is fully achieved."

Benchmarks / Datasets

provisional (inferred)

Not extracted

No benchmark anchors detected.

"LLM-based RTL code generation methods increasingly target both functional correctness and PPA quality, yet existing approaches universally decouple the two objectives, optimizing PPA only after correctness is fully achieved."

Reported Metrics

provisional (inferred)

Not extracted

No metric anchors detected.

"LLM-based RTL code generation methods increasingly target both functional correctness and PPA quality, yet existing approaches universally decouple the two objectives, optimizing PPA only after correctness is fully achieved."

Rater Population

provisional (inferred)

Unknown

Rater source not explicitly reported.

"LLM-based RTL code generation methods increasingly target both functional correctness and PPA quality, yet existing approaches universally decouple the two objectives, optimizing PPA only after correctness is fully achieved."

Human Feedback Details

This page is using abstract-level cues only right now. Treat the signals below as provisional.

  • Potential human-data signal: No explicit human-data keywords detected.
  • Potential benchmark anchors: No benchmark names detected in abstract.
  • Abstract highlights: 3 key sentence(s) extracted below.

Evaluation Details

Evaluation fields are inferred from the abstract only.

  • Potential evaluation modes: No explicit eval keywords detected.
  • Potential metric signals: No metric keywords detected.
  • Confidence: Provisional (metadata-only fallback).

Research Brief

Metadata summary

LLM-based RTL code generation methods increasingly target both functional correctness and PPA quality, yet existing approaches universally decouple the two objectives, optimizing PPA only after correctness is fully achieved.

Based on abstract + metadata only. Check the source paper before making high-confidence protocol decisions.

Key Takeaways

  • LLM-based RTL code generation methods increasingly target both functional correctness and PPA quality, yet existing approaches universally decouple the two objectives, optimizing PPA only after correctness is fully achieved.
  • Whether through sequential multi-agent pipelines, evolutionary search with binary correctness gates, or hierarchical reward dependencies, partially correct but architecturally promising candidates are systematically discarded.
  • Moreover, existing methods reduce the multi-objective PPA space to a single scalar fitness, obscuring the trade-offs among area, delay, and power.

Researcher Actions

  • Compare this paper against nearby papers in the same arXiv category before using it for protocol decisions.
  • Check the full text for explicit evaluation design choices (raters, protocol, and metrics).
  • Use related-paper links to find stronger protocol-specific references.

Caveats

  • Generated from abstract + metadata only; no PDF parsing.
  • Signals below are heuristic and may miss details reported outside the abstract.

Recommended Queries

Related Papers

Papers are ranked by protocol overlap, extraction signal alignment, and semantic proximity.

No related papers found for this item yet.

Get Started

Join the #1 Platform for AI Training Talent

Where top AI builders and expert AI Trainers connect to build the future of AI.
Self-Service
Post a Job
Post your project and get a shortlist of qualified AI Trainers and Data Labelers. Hire and manage your team in the tools you already use.
Managed Service
For Large Projects
Done-for-You
We recruit, onboard, and manage a dedicated team inside your tools. End-to-end operations for large or complex projects.
For Freelancers
Join as an AI Trainer
Find AI training and data labeling projects across platforms, all in one place. One profile, one application process, more opportunities.