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
The paper presents a systematic analysis of five state‑of‑the‑art automated program repair agents, tracing their decision‑making across 500 real‑world repair tasks. It finds that while the agents perform well on simple fixes, they struggle with logic‑intensive bugs, often producing verbose, overfitted patches that pass tests without addressing root causes. Key bottlenecks identified include poor test generation, limited regression test selection, and reliance on primitive tooling without access to debuggers or advanced program analysis tools.
By Ira Ceka, Hailie Mitchell, Saurabh Pujar, Luca Buratti, Shyam Ramji, Junfeng Yang, Gail Kaiser, Baishakhi Ray
arXiv:2506.13182v3 Announce Type: replace-cross
Abstract: [...] Since then, various APR approaches, especially those leveraging the power of large language models (LLMs), have been rapidly developed...
By Anh Ho, Thanh Le-Cong, Bach Le, Christine Rizkallah
arXiv:2609.10123v1 Announce Type: cross
Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) have become ubiquitous in software development, with LLM-based automated program repair tools increasingly used during c...
By Xietao Wang-Lin, Anton Isopoussu, Louis Mahon
The paper investigates hallucination in large language model–based automated program repair (APR). It defines hallucination as producing patches or intermediate artifacts that are not grounded in available repair evidence, and analyzes it across final patches and intermediate tasks such as triggering test case identification, line coverage prediction, and additional test case generation. Experiments on 832 Defects4J bugs show that only 21.0%–55.9% of patches pass the developer test suite, with 72.7% of sampled repairs exhibiting hallucinations, often due to incorrect causal localization or repair strategies.
By Xuemeng Cai, Jiakun Liu, Linhan Yang, Wei Ma, Lingxiao Jiang
Large language models (LLMs) have become ubiquitous in software development, with LLM-based automated program repair tools increasingly used during code review. In this report, we explore the iterativ...
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: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:2505. 07372v3 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: This paper presents a novel methodology for enhancing Automated Program Repair (APR) through synthetic data generation utilizing Large Language Models (LLMs).
By David de-Fitero-Dominguez, Antonio Garcia-Cabot, Eva Garcia-Lopez
arXiv:2608. 04682v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Coding agents powered by large language models (LLMs) are increasingly adopted in software engineering (SWE) scenarios, capable of fixing a specific bug in large-scale codebase.
By Haobin Li, Ping Deng, Weizhong Qian, Liang Jiang, Zhenyu Huang, Mouxing Yang, Xi Peng
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
The paper investigates how large language models (LLMs) handle bug fixing versus problem solving in competitive programming. Using a dataset of ~3,000 Codeforces submissions and their human fixes, the authors compare LLM-generated patches to human patches and assess whether LLMs prefer to modify buggy code or generate new solutions. Results show that LLMs often alter more lines than necessary and sometimes produce entirely new solutions, performing better when allowed to generate solutions from scratch rather than patching existing code.
By Alexandru Stefan Stoica, Traian Rebedea, Marian Cristian Mihaescu