arXiv:2607. 06766v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: At Amazon Prime Video, we face the critical operational challenge of managing code deployments during live events and rapid feature releases without causing service outages.
By Mayur Kurup, Hyunjae Suh, Swathi Vaidyanathan, Pranesh Vyas, Srinidhi Madabhushi, Yegor Silyutin
arXiv:2607. 29516v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: AI coding agents are generating code at volumes that exceed the capacity of traditional peer review.
By Chandra Maddila, Mashrur Rashik, Euna Mehnaz Khan, Smriti Jha, James Saindon, Nachi Nagappan, Peter C. Rigby
arXiv:2607. 25130v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Imperfections in AI-generated code require that software developers modify the generated code manually, or by re-prompting an AI programming assistant.
By Jenny T. Liang, Mihika Bairathi, Wayne Chi, Ameet Talwalkar, Nishant Subramani, Valerie Chen
arXiv:2509.21891v3 Announce Type: replace-cross
Abstract: Fine-tuning large language models for code editing has typically relied on mining commits and pull requests. The working hypothesis has been...
By Yangtian Zi, Zixuan Wu, Aleksander Boruch-Gruszecki, Jonathan Bell, Arjun Guha
The paper introduces MCR-Bench, a benchmark for realistic multi‑round code review that includes 2,269 real‑world tasks across five programming languages, each annotated with fine‑grained defect information and dynamic state labels. Experiments with mainstream large language models show limited overall performance, especially as interaction rounds increase, and reveal that model accuracy varies by defect type and severity. Error analysis identifies key failure mechanisms such as cross‑round temporal misalignment and insufficient long‑range memory.
By Dewu Zheng, Yanlin Wang, Xiwen Wang, Kefeng Duan, Hongyu Zhang, Xilin Liu, Yuchi Ma, Zibin Zheng
arXiv:2607. 25873v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Large Language Model (LLM)-based Automated Program Repair systems are advancing rapidly, yet their performance remains inconsistent.
By Ramtin Ehsani, Irene Manotas, Saurabh Pujar, Luca Buratti, Preetha Chatterjee
arXiv:2605. 17548v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Code review has evolved for decades, from informal peer checking to today's pull request (PR) workflows, yet it remains a largely manual and cognitively demanding process.
By H\"useyin \"Ozg\"ur Kamal{\i}, Erdem Tuna, Vahid Haratian, Eray T\"uz\"un
arXiv:2608. 06640v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: The widespread integration of AI coding assistants offers undeniable boosts to engineering velocity.
By Michael Tran, Fred Lewis, Kun Yang, Saksham Thakur, Aditya Kini, Aditya Patil, Milad Hashemi, Parthasarathy Ranganathan
arXiv:2605. 30208v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: AI-assisted coding tools have altered software production.
By Chris Adams, Arjun Singh Banga, Parveen Bansal, Souvik Bhattacharya, Payal Bhuptani, Rujin Cao, Pedro Canahuati, Nate Cook, Brian Ellis, Prabhakar Goyal, Gurinder Grewal, Tianyu He, Matt Labunka, Alex Manners, David Molnar, Ging Cee Ng, Vishal Parekh, Jiefu Pei, Frederic Sagnes, James Saindon, Will Shackleton, Sid Sidhu, Gursharan Singh, Karthik Chengayan Sridhar, Matt Steiner, Pratibha Udmalpet, Sean Xia, Stacey Yan, Audris Mockus, Peter Rigby, Nachiappan Nagappan
arXiv:2601. 19072v3 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Large Language models (LLMs) have shown strong capabilities in code review automation, such as review comment generation, yet they suffer from hallucinations -- where the generated review comments are ungrounded in the actual code -- poses a significant challenge to the adoption of LLMs in code review workflows.
By Kla Tantithamthavorn, Hong Yi Lin, Patanamon Thongtanunam, Wachiraphan Charoenwet, Minwoo Jeong, Ming Wu
arXiv:2606. 00049v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) are widely recognised for their applications in natural language generation and are increasingly used for code generation tasks.
By Yuxi Chen, Yutian Tang, Timothy Storer
The paper investigates how to improve confidence calibration for large language models (LLMs) used in automated code revision (ACR). It proposes applying local Platt-scaling to three fine-grained confidence scores, rather than the conventional global method, and demonstrates that this approach consistently reduces calibration error across multiple tasks, metrics, and model sizes. The study shows that fine-grained calibration, especially when combined with global scaling, yields more reliable confidence estimates for ACR tasks.
By Hong Yi Lin, Chunhua Liu, Haoyu Gao, Patanamon Thongtanunam, Christoph Treude