arXiv:2608.27831v1 Announce Type: cross
Abstract: Coding agents are now commonly evaluated on the SWE-bench family of benchmarks, whose tasks are built from curated GitHub issues--long, structured, a...
By Gyuhyeong Kim, Hyojung Gwon, Jeonghyeon Kim, Kyuhong Shim, Sunjae Lee
The behavior of contemporary generative Large Language Models (LLMs) is directly shaped by prompts, unstructured texts that describe the desired output and model behavior. In this paper we argue that prompts are linguistic objects that merit investigation in their own right.
The paper investigates how large language models (LLMs) can perform multi-coder qualitative coding by independently coding, debating, and reconciling disagreements. It quantifies the effectiveness of this approach across diverse datasets, identifying key factors—such as codebook length, data similarity, and agent disagreement—that influence coding accuracy. The study finds that intense, unresolved debates improve accuracy but that LLMs still lack adaptive responsiveness to context, leading to design recommendations for automated coding systems.
By Jeongyeon Kim, John Mitchell
The paper introduces CodeRQ-Bench, the first benchmark for assessing large language model reasoning quality across coding tasks such as generation, summarization, and classification. It analyzes over a thousand mismatches from existing evaluators, identifies recurring limitations, and derives design insights that lead to a new two‑stage evaluator, VERA. Experiments show VERA outperforms strong baselines, improving AUCROC by up to 0.26 and AUPRC by up to 0.21 on four datasets.
By Yuangang Li, Justin Tian Jin Chen, Ethan Yu, David Hong, Iftekhar Ahmed
arXiv:2607. 02057v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: In recent years, it has become increasingly evident that large language models (LLMs) and autonomous agents raise the level of abstraction in software development by shifting the focus from writing precise procedures to expressing intents and goals.
By Florian Tambon, Michael Konstantinou, Cedric Richter, Charles Chenouard, Mark Harman, Mike Papadakis
arXiv:2608. 11513v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Large Language Models (LLMs) are increasingly integrated into software engineering workflows, helping developers write, debug, test, and maintain code.
By Alex Deaconu, Anubhav Gupta, Manaal Basha, Nicholas Haydu, Gema Rodr\'iguez-P\'erez
arXiv:2606. 11166v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Large Language Models (LLMs) are increasingly described as performing at the level of human experts on knowledge economy tasks.
By George Perrett, Javae Elliott, Jennifer Hill, Marc Scott
arXiv:2608.21074v1 Announce Type: cross
Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly used in research workflows and software development pipelines, yet their output remains sensitive to in...
By Erik Thureck, Robert K\"uhnen, Tim Jacobowitz
Large Language Models (LLMs) perform differently on identical programming tasks when prompted in different natural languages, a phenomenon known as language bias. While this behavior has been widely studied for general text generation, its impact on code generation quality and programming conventions remains largely unexplored.
Large Language Models (LLMs) often generate natural-language comments while writing code, and these comments become part of the context used to generate the code that follows. However, it remains uncl...
arXiv:2508. 16131v3 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Code completion entails the task of providing missing tokens given a surrounding context.
By Zoe Kotti, Konstantina Dritsa, Diomidis Spinellis, Panos Louridas
arXiv:2607. 14816v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Large Language Models (LLMs) perform differently on identical programming tasks when prompted in different natural languages, a phenomenon known as language bias.
By Saima Afrin, Alessandro Midolo, Camilo Escobar-Vel\'asquez, Mario Linares-V\'asquez, Weiyuan Ding, Bowen Xu, Massimiliano Di Penta, Antonio Mastropaolo