Passing Tests, Missing Semantics: Evidence of Interpretive Lock-In in Plan-Based DataFrame Code Generation

arXiv:2610.15797v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Planning and revision are intended to bring generated code closer to the task specification. Yet a mistaken interpretation can persist across the plan, implementation, and tests - a pattern we call interpretive lock-in. We investigate this risk on 30 DataFrame tasks derived from TPC Benchmark DS, comparing Frozen One-Pass, Test-Guided Revision, and PlanAudit-Guided Revision. Test-pass counts rose from 22/30 to 29/30 and 30/30, yet no generated solution matched its stored reference output. Evaluator controls returned the expected outcome in 57/57

This content is for informational purposes only and is not professional advice. Specifications, prices, plan tiers, and features change frequently and may differ from what is shown here; verify current details on the manufacturer's or company's official page before purchasing. Ratings are based on analysis of published documentation, not independent lab testing.