arXiv Computation and Language

Large Language Models for Programming: Actually Fixing or Reimplementing Incorrect Code?

The paper investigates how large language models (LLMs) handle bug fixing versus problem solving in competitive programming. Using a dataset of ~3,000 Codeforces submissions and their human fixes, the authors compare LLM-generated patches to human patches and assess whether LLMs prefer to modify buggy code or generate new solutions. Results show that LLMs often alter more lines than necessary and sometimes produce entirely new solutions, performing better when allowed to generate solutions from scratch rather than patching existing code.

Hugging Face Trending Papers
Sep 24

Large Language Models for Programming: Actually Fixing or Reimplementing Incorrect Code?

The paper investigates how Large Language Models (LLMs) handle bug fixing compared to human-written patches by analyzing about 3,000 Codeforces submissions. It finds that LLMs often modify more lines than necessary and sometimes produce entirely new solutions, and that they solve more problems correctly when generating solutions from scratch rather than patching existing code. The study highlights implications for AI‑assisted programming tools, suggesting a shift toward incremental problem‑solving strategies.

arXiv AI
Aug 11

A Unified Issue Resolution Benchmark for Requirement Clarification, Planning, and Code Generation for Coding Agents

arXiv:2608. 09072v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Large language model-powered coding agents are increasingly used to modify existing code repositories, for example, by adding features or fixing bugs.

By Xin Zhou, Chun Yong Chong, Kisub Kim, Yun Peng, Rui Shu, Zihan Wu, Xu Han, Guowen Yuan, Zeyang Zhuang, Jounghoon Kim, Jeongjin Ju, Seongmin Ju, Taein Yoon, David Lo
arXiv AI
Sep 24

Can LLMs Reason About Runtime Behavior? A Repository-Level Dynamic Benchmark

The paper introduces SWE-Flux, a repository‑level benchmark designed to test large language models’ ability to reason about runtime behavior. It contains 480 execution‑grounded instances from 12 real Python repositories, with gold answers automatically harvested from instrumented test executions. Evaluation of five LLMs shows the task remains difficult, with the best model achieving only 37% accuracy, and the benchmark can generate challenging variants through input perturbation.

By Hamed Taherkhani, Mohammad Abdollahi, Melika Sepidband, Hridya Dhulipala, Tien N. Nguyen, Hadi Hemmati
arXiv AI
Jun 3

Toward Training Superintelligent Software Agents through Self-Play SWE-RL

arXiv:2512. 18552v3 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: While current software agents powered by large language models (LLMs) and agentic reinforcement learning (RL) can boost programmer productivity, their training data (e.

By Yuxiang Wei, Zhiqing Sun, Emily McMilin, Jonas Gehring, David Zhang, Gabriel Synnaeve, Daniel Fried, Lingming Zhang, Sida Wang