PCodeTrans: Translate Decompiled Pseudocode to Compilable and Executable Equivalent
Open accessAbstract
Decompilation is foundational to binary analysis, yet conventional tools prioritize human readability over strict recompilability and verifiable runtime correctness. While recent LLM-based approaches attempt to refine decompiled pseudocode, they typically either optimize solely for readability or rely on static analysis for evaluation. This makes them prone to "semantic hallucinations" that compromise accuracy and fail to resolve actual runtime failures. For critical tasks like software modernization and vulnerability remediation, recovered code must not only compile but replicate the original binary's behavior. We present PCodeTrans, a feedback-driven framework that bridges the gap between decompilation, recompilation, and rigorous function-level dynamic validation. After extracting a minimal yet coherent context to guarantee recompilability, PCodeTrans employs an in situ substitutable engine to hot-swap the compiled function directly into the unmodified binary, natively preserving its authentic execution context and global dependencies. Guided by fine-grained differential tracing, PCodeTrans generates precise runtime feedback to iteratively guide an LLM in repairing semantic discrepancies. Evaluated on Coreutils and Binutils, PCodeTrans achieves unprecedented recovery performance when rectifying raw Hex-Rays outputs, attaining 100% function-level compilability on unstripped binaries alongside 99.55% and 99.89% test-validated behavioral consistency, respectively. In doing so, it resolves 76.56% and 79.74% of logic errors exposed by official test suites. Exhibiting exceptional resilience, PCodeTrans maintains over 96% behavioral consistency even on fully stripped binaries. By significantly outperforming all existing baselines, PCodeTrans paves a practical path to reliably translate decompiled pseudocode into compilable and executable equivalents.
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
- Authors
- Cui, Y., Gao, Z., He, S., Qin, S., & Zhang, C.
- Affiliations
- Tsinghua University (CN)
- Wuhan University (CN)
- Institute of Information Engineering (CN)
- Venue
- arXiv
- Publisher
- arXiv
- Published
- 2026
- ISSN
- 2331-8422 (ISSN-L)
- arXiv
- 2603.14855
- OpenAlex
- W7138041967
- Cited by
- 0
- References
- 0
- Type
- posted content
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- arxiv.org
- Locations
- arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
- arXiv (Cornell University)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Software Engineering Research
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Security and Verification in Computing
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Software › Software Testing and Debugging Techniques
- Keywords
- decompilation, recompilation, semantic hallucination, dynamic validation, stripped binaries, binary analysis, software modernization, vulnerability remediation
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review