arXiv:2608. 05179v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Large language model (LLM) agents are increasingly used across the scientific research lifecycle: ideation, literature search, experiment design and execution, analysis, manuscript drafting, and review.
arXiv:2606. 05646v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) have enabled powerful software engineering (SE) agents capable of navigating complex codebases and resolving real-world issues.
AgentFold is a multi‑agent framework that treats protein‑folding model design as a closed‑loop search over executable code variants. Starting from the ESMFold codebase, the agents generate hypotheses, modify and debug code, evaluate model variants, and store both successes and failures in structured memory, guided by an MCTS‑style policy that allocates GPU resources. In an engineering‑scale experiment, AgentFold explored about 80 variants using 5,000 GPU‑hours and 170 million LLM tokens, improving the best lDDT score by 7.5% over independent Codex proposals and outperforming a random‑search baseline, while also uncovering empirical design patterns such as the benefits of early, soft, learnable priors.
arXiv:2607. 18161v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Coding agents are increasingly used to accelerate code generation in many downstream tasks, such as fixing bugs, building applications, and prototyping.
AI code agents are increasingly deployed to resolve real software issues, yet their reliability under superficial code variations remains poorly understood. We evaluate whether coding agents that repa...
arXiv:2607. 20499v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Large Language Models generate plausible backend code, but a single-pass paradigm provides no guarantee of correctness or runtime reliability.
The paper investigates how AI code agents perform when the surrounding code is rewritten in a semantically equivalent way. Using a random variant sampler that applies control‑flow rewrites, dead‑code injection, and identifier renaming, the authors evaluate two agent scaffolds—mini‑SWE agent and OpenCode—backed by four frontier models across SWE‑bench datasets. Results show modest drops in resolve‑rate (up to 6.7 percentage points) with significant degradations in 6 of 16 configurations, and reveal that robustness varies across models and scaffolds, forming a jagged frontier.
arXiv:2607. 13091v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: LLM-based coding agents repeat the same classes of mistakes across sessions because they lack a mechanism to retain corrections from human review feedback.
arXiv:2607. 02469v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Software tests and code evolve together: a code change should be followed by new or updated tests that record the new software behavior.
arXiv:2608. 02712v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Kernel generation for hardware accelerators such as GPUs and NPUs has become a proving ground for large language models (LLMs), and state-of-the-art systems raise correctness through pipelines that couple LLMs with agentic reinforcement learning and evolutionary search.
arXiv:2604. 01527v4 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Production deployment of AI coding agents requires fast, reproducible evaluation signals.
arXiv:2607. 13034v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Large language model (LLM) agents increasingly automate multi-step engineering and informatics workflows, yet they rarely ask how much effort a task actually requires.