SLMFix is a code‑generation pipeline that uses a small language model fine‑tuned with reinforcement learning to correct syntactic errors in programs produced by large language models for domain‑specific languages. The approach relies on interpreter feedback to guide the error‑fixing process. Experiments show that SLMFix improves validator pass rates by 40% on low‑resource programming languages and removes over 50% of syntactic errors on high‑resource DSLs, outperforming supervised fine‑tuning even for 7B models.
By David Jiahao Fu, Aryan Gupta, Aaron Councilman, Yu-Xiong Wang, Vikram Adve
arXiv:2507. 22580v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Automated Program Repair (APR) seeks to automatically correct software bugs without requiring human intervention.
By Marcos Fuster-Pena, David de-Fitero-Dominguez, Antonio Garcia-Cabot, Eva Garcia-Lopez
The paper introduces RobustTests, a framework that improves reinforcement learning for code generation by synthesizing test cases from faulty code and refining rewards with a dense, stepwise function. It uses validator agents and behavioral clustering to filter out invalid or redundant tests, and incorporates pass‑rate‑based rewards to counter hallucination noise. Experiments on CodeContests and LiveCodeBench show that fine‑tuning Qwen3‑32B with RobustTests yields a 3% absolute performance gain over baseline methods.
By Yiwen Zhang, Xiaodong Yan, Zhenyu Huang, Deng Zhao, Liang Jiang, Qing Cui, Zujie Wen, Zhiqiang Zhang, Jun Zhou
arXiv:2503. 09020v3 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Large Language Models (LLMs) have been widely adopted in commercial code completion engines, significantly enhancing coding efficiency and productivity.
By Liang Lu, Yuan Jiang, Christoph Treude, Shuzheng Gao, Jingyu Xiao, Xiaohong Su, Michael R. Lyu
SWE-Critix is a post‑training pipeline that creates generalist verifiers for coding‑agent trajectories. It uses supervised fine‑tuning followed by reinforcement learning to train 30B models on CodeForge‑Preview data, enabling the verifier to predict completion labels and generate natural‑language explanations. The approach raises classification accuracy from 57% to 78% on a held‑out test set.
By Jiajun Hu, Chun Yong Chong
arXiv:2606. 18286v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Supervised fine-tuning of code LLMs typically applies uniform cross-entropy loss to all response tokens, implicitly assuming that every token provides equally useful learning signal.
By Zhijie Deng, Ling Li, Jinlong Pang, Kaiqin Hu, Qi Xuan, Zhaowei Zhu, Jiaheng Wei
CHAI for LLMs is a framework that improves large language models’ performance on code‑mixed translation tasks by using LLMs as annotators to create preference data, applying reinforcement learning from AI feedback, incorporating LLM‑generated domain knowledge for iterative refinement, and evaluating on real‑world datasets. The approach yields a 68.45% average win rate over state‑of‑the‑art open‑source models in human‑adjudicated tests. It demonstrates a scalable method to enhance code‑mixed language understanding in open‑source LLMs.
By Wenbo Zhang, Aditya Majumdar, Asif Ekbal, Amulya Yadav
arXiv:2609.39107v1 Announce Type: new
Abstract: Large Language Models (LLMs) have been applied in various fields. However, ensuring compliance and safety of LLMs, such as avoiding discrimination and...
By Yan Zhang, Chuming Wei, Ruien Li, Yaoyao Peng, Wusheng Zhang, Guangwen Yang
arXiv:2609.14839v1 Announce Type: cross
Abstract: The integration of Large Language Models (LLMs) into automated code optimization introduces a critical reliability risk we term the Efficiency Halluc...
By Sarah Wilson, Gail Kaiser, Patrick Musau
arXiv:2610.15894v1 Announce Type: cross
Abstract: Large language model (LLM) code-repair systems fix faulty programs by repeatedly generating and testing revisions. Each revision is costly, making th...
By Elad Sharony, Ido Greenberg, Jialin Song, Shie Mannor, Gal Chechik, Eli Meirom
The paper investigates the problem of over‑editing by large language models (LLMs) when repairing code, showing that even state‑of‑the‑art models like GPT‑5.5 often rewrite more code than necessary. Using a benchmark of 400 BigCodeBench problems with controlled AST‑level corruptions, the authors quantify over‑editing and demonstrate that a simple preservation instruction can significantly reduce excess edits and cognitive complexity while improving Pass@1. They further explore post‑training strategies, finding that reinforcement learning yields the best balance between edit fidelity and performance retention, thereby establishing edit fidelity as a distinct, measurable dimension of code‑repair quality.
BoostAPR is a three-stage framework that improves automated program repair by using execution-grounded reinforcement learning with dual reward models. The approach first fine‑tunes a model on execution‑verified demonstrations, then trains a sequence‑level assessor and a line‑level credit allocator from execution outcomes, and finally applies PPO optimization where the line‑level model redistributes rewards to critical edit regions. Evaluated on SWE‑Gym and four benchmarks, BoostAPR achieves significant gains, including 40.7% on SWE‑bench Verified and 95.0% on QuixBugs, demonstrating strong cross‑language generalization.
By Yuanhao Li, Hongbo Wang, Xiaotang Shang, Xunzhu Tang, Yiming Cao, Xuhong Chen