Sign inGet started
Paper · arXiv

Wrong Design Intent Is Worse Than Never Conditioning: A Derangement-Control Diagnosis of Header Conditioning in CAD Program Completion

Fine-tuned code LLMs are routinely conditioned on a design-intent specification, but the correctness axis of such a signal -- a wrong intent rather than an absent one -- has not been tested, and the benefit of conditioning is usually scored with the same detector that defines the signal. We study CADCON, a five-feature design-intent header prepended to CadQuery-style programs during LoRA fine-tuning of Qwen2.5-Coder-1.5B, scoring adherence with executable geometric assertions that share no code with the header-defining extractor. On a pre-registered sample of 400 deduplicated held-out programs stratified over eleven intent profiles, at 40% prefix and three seeds, a semantically wrong head...

AuthorsYang Xiao
Primary categorycs.LG
Published25 July 2026
Last updated at source13 August 2026
cs.LGcs.GR
Embed this entry
<iframe src="https://silytics.si/embed/item/75168f61-91aa-4aed-bb8e-47fc85dad8ec" width="420" height="190" style="border:0" loading="lazy" title="Silytics entry"></iframe>

Free, no tracking. More about feeds and embeds.

Silytics shows public metadata from arXiv and links to the original. Information may be incomplete or out of date. Last refreshed 17 October 2026. Licenses and terms of the original apply to the work itself. Not financial, legal or professional advice.