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
arXiv:2608. 14065v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Background: Software bugs remain a critical challenge in development, necessitating effective Automated Program Repair (APR) techniques.
By Junchi Liu, Ali Bigdeli, Roya Daneshi, Atu Ambala, Sudipto Ghosh, Fabio Santos
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:2505. 03818v3 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Large Language Models (LLMs) can achieve strong performance on everyday coding tasks, but they can fail on complex tasks that require non-trivial reasoning about program semantics.
By Antonio Valerio Miceli-Barone, Vaishak Belle, Ali Payani
arXiv:2607. 19843v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) have made automated program repair (APR) increasingly practical for real-world bugs, but repairing directly from bug reports remains underconstrained.
By Yuhao Tan, Zhibang Yang, Fangkai Yang, Yuan Yao, Yu Kang, Lu Wang, Pu Zhao, Xin Zhang, Xiaoxing Ma, Qingwei Lin, Saravan Rajmohan, Dongmei Zhang
arXiv:2607. 12605v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) have improved automated program repair (APR), but two limitations remain.
By Zhili Huang, Ling Xu, Hongyu Zhang
arXiv:2606. 29088v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: There are various benchmarks to evaluate bugfixing capabilities of Large Language Models.
By Bal\'azs Szalontai, \'Abel Szauter, Bal\'azs M\'arton, P\'eter Verebics, Bal\'azs Pint\'er, Tibor Gregorics
arXiv:2607. 04537v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Code language models are now trusted collaborators in production workflows for debugging, refactoring, and iterative repair, and every benchmark that evaluates them assumes the instructions they act on are correct.
By Raj Jaiswal, Anany Singh Divy, Savar Bhasin, Adi Bajpai, Tanuja Ganu, Rajiv Ratn Shah
arXiv:2604. 17184v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Large Language Models (LLMs) can generate plausible code patches, but plausibility is not enough for automated repair: a patch must compile, pass tests, and remove the target vulnerability.
By Yifan Zhang, Jieyu Li, Kexin Pei, Yu Huang, Kevin Leach
Code language models are now trusted collaborators in production workflows for debugging, refactoring, and iterative repair, and every benchmark that evaluates them assumes the instructions they act on are correct. We study what happens when that assumption breaks.
arXiv:2607. 00990v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Large language model (LLM)-based software engineering agents are increasingly developed to resolve software issues by generating patches from issue reports and code repositories.
By Yaoqi Guo, Yang Liu, Jie M. Zhang, Yun Ma, Yiling Lou, Zhenpeng Chen
arXiv:2605. 13138v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Automated detection of vulnerability-fixing commits (\vfcs) is critical for timely security patch deployment, as advisory databases lag patch releases by a median of 25 days and many fixes never receive advisories.
By Nils Loose, Joseph Bienh\"uls, Kristoffer Hempel, Felix M\"achtle, Thomas Eisenbarth