Individual skill

cav-experiments

Use when designing or auditing a CAV (Computer Aided Verification) empirical evaluation, covering standard benchmark sets (SV-COMP/SMT-COMP/HWMCC/VNN-COMP), fair baseline solvers with pinned versions and equal resource limits, timeout-dominated comparisons, soundness cross-checks and proof witnesses, cactus/scatter reporting, and matching evidence to the shape of each verification claim.

CAV-Skills/skills/cav-experiments/SKILL.md

Read pinned source

Source commit 932eb23331721b16e967c59f093781be1928b498

What was checked

Matches the observed repository HEAD: Yes
Scanner rules are current: Yes
Repository scan complete: No
Skill scan complete: Yes
Observed behavior: Network or broad shell
Last checked: Nov 9, 2026

These are observations at the recorded commit, not a guarantee of safety. Review the source before running it.

Install this skill

Choose an agent in your Stack or copy a command below. Commands fetch the pinned commit and copy only this skill directory. Existing destinations are refused. Copying a command does not install anything.

An install command is unavailable: current rules, complete repository and skill scans, an eligible behavior level and a permitted license are required.

Repository context

Repository stars (not skill ratings): 1,393
Repository last updated: Sep 27, 2026
License: MIT

Observed agent integration: No specific integration evidence. Standard SKILL.md installation does not imply verified compatibility.

academic-writing Repository topic
agent-skills Repository topic
journal Repository topic
academic-research Repository topic
ai-agents Repository topic
anthropic Repository topic
awesome-list Repository topic
claude Repository topic
claude-code Repository topic
economics Repository topic
engineering Derived category

Files and excerpt

File metadata and permitted, redacted excerpts come from the recorded scan. Source links are pinned to that commit.

Browse files

SKILL.mdcore · 5,375 bytes

Read excerpt


# CAV Experiments

Use this before submission when the evaluation is not yet locked. CAV reviewers are verification
researchers; the empirical section is where a good technique is won or lost. The organizing principle
is **evidence proportional to the claim** — the evaluation must test what the paper asserts, on
benchmarks and baselines a skeptic accepts, under a resource budget that makes the comparison fair.

## Evaluation audit

- **Match evidence to the claim shape.** A **soundness** claim needs a proof and/or a checkable
  witness, not a benchmark score. A **performance** claim needs a fair comparison on standard
  benchmarks under equal limits. A **capability** claim ("solves instances prior tools cannot") needs
  those instances and the prior tools actually run.
- **Use standard benchmark sets** at a **pinned revision** (SV-COMP, SMT-COMP, HWMCC, VNN-COMP, or a