arXiv:2607. 05188v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: A coding agent solving a software-engineering task spends dozens of steps reasoning, editing code, and running tests, yet little is known about what the underlying language model internally represents about the program it is working on.
arXiv:2606. 10933v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: LLM-based coding agents are usually evaluated in familiar software settings: mainstream languages, common libraries, and public repositories.
The paper introduces AutoMat, a benchmark designed to test large language model (LLM) coding agents on their ability to reproduce claims from computational materials science. AutoMat presents three challenges: reconstructing underspecified procedures, navigating specialized toolchains, and assessing whether the evidence supports a claim. Experiments show that current LLM agents achieve low success rates, with the best setting reaching only 53%, and failures stem mainly from incomplete procedures, methodological deviations, and execution fragility.
arXiv:2607. 03691v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Coding agents, autonomous systems that use large language models (LLMs) to resolve software engineering tasks, rely on agent harness: a middleware layer in between a developer and a large language model that orchestrates system prompts, tool execution, context management, and iterative reasoning loops.
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...
E2E-SWE is a benchmark that tests large language models’ ability to create complete, functional software repositories from scratch. It includes 186 tasks across 11 programming languages, each requiring an agent to build an installable project based solely on a natural‑language specification and an empty workspace, while passing a hidden test suite. The benchmark was crafted by software engineers and LLMs, then refined through iterative verification by autonomous agents to ensure clarity and solvability.
arXiv:2605.21384v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: As long-horizon coding agents produce more code than any developer can review, oversight collapses onto a single surface: the automated test...
arXiv:2606. 07412v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: LLM-driven software engineering agents have become a central testbed for real-world language-model capability, yet their training remains limited by the availability of high-quality SWE tasks.
arXiv:2609.38269v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Coding agents are increasingly asked to build software rather than patch it, yet benchmarks for from-scratch repository construction are mostly limit...
arXiv:2608. 16742v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Large Language Models (LLMs) have achieved remarkable progress in code generation, yet ensuring correctness in complex, repository-level tasks remains challenging.
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.
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.
Large Language Models (LLMs) have achieved remarkable progress in code generation, yet ensuring correctness in complex, repository-level tasks remains challenging. Existing approaches often use generated tests as static post-hoc validators, which limits their ability to guide implementation and may introduce misleading feedback when the tests themselves are incomplete or incorrect.