arXiv:2602. 06470v3 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Scaling training data and model parameters has long driven progress in large language models (LLMs), but this paradigm is increasingly constrained by the scarcity of high-quality data and diminishing returns from rising computational costs.
By Changyue Wang, Weihang Su, Qingyao Ai, Xingzhao Yue, Rui Zhang, Xiaojia Chang, Yiqun Liu
Code Comprehensor is a hybrid retrieval‑reasoning framework designed to aid understanding of large codebases. It combines a code dependency callgraph, CodeScribe—which generates hierarchical documentation using code‑aware LLMs—and CodeContrast, a CLIP‑style dual‑encoder that learns aligned text‑code embeddings for fast, semantically precise retrieval. Experiments on OpenCV and a 5M‑LOC proprietary repository show that CodeScribe‑derived supervision improves cross‑modal retrieval accuracy, and LLM‑based evaluation reports over 90% faithfulness.
By Sujoy Roychowdhury, Joseph H. R. Isaac, Jiangning Gao, Martin Klitte, Diarmuid Corcoran
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. 24882v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Modern coding agents are usually evaluated by whether they eventually produce a correct patch, but patch generation depends on an earlier context-acquisition stage: finding the repository files needed for the task.
By Bowen Qin, Yi Xie
arXiv:2609.01601v1 Announce Type: cross
Abstract: The repository-level code generation task requires synthesizing code that satisfies task requirements while remaining consistent with the target repo...
By Kefeng Duan, Dewu Zheng, Yanlin Wang, Terry Yue Zhuo, Mingwei Liu, Jianxing Yu, Jiachi Chen, Ensheng Shi, Xilin Liu, Yuchi Ma, Zibin Zheng
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
arXiv:2606. 03657v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Large language models for code generation often need to use APIs that are absent from their pretraining data.
By Jinnuo Liu, Yue Peng, Jinhan Niu, Hongyi Wen
arXiv:2610.05437v2 Announce Type: replace
Abstract: Computer-use agents need to capture procedural knowledge of how people use software. User telemetry offers a scalable source of this knowledge. How...
By Justin Chih-Yao Chen, Elias Stengel-Eskin, Yan Chen, Pol Llado, Scott Counts, Mohit Bansal, Benjamin Van Durme, Harsh Jhamtani, Gaurav Verma
arXiv:2606. 14654v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Sequential or time-stamped interaction logs provide objective records of digital application usage, yet their granularity and noise often obscure meaningful insights into people's work.
By Gaurav Verma, Scott Counts
The paper introduces SaraCoder, a retrieval‑augmented framework that improves knowledge density for repository‑level code completion by pruning redundant context and selectively injecting cross‑file dependency definitions within a fixed token budget. It employs a Hierarchical Feature Optimization module to reduce an over‑complete candidate pool in four stages, freeing tokens for an External‑Aware Identifier Disambiguator. Experiments on CrossCodeEval and RepoEval‑Updated demonstrate that SaraCoder outperforms strong RAG baselines such as GraphCoder and Repocoder across multiple code LLMs without increasing token usage, and achieves synergistic gains when combined with other cross‑file methods.
By Xiaohan Chen, Xiang Chen, Yu Tian, Piji Li, Sheng-Jun Huang, Songcan Chen
arXiv:2608. 10319v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Large language model (LLM)-powered agents have rapidly evolved from code-completion tools into solvers of complex software engineering tasks.
By Shuyan Huang, Kai Du, Andrew Lan
The paper introduces DECODE, a dataset of 53.6K real‑world in‑IDE edits of AI‑generated code from over 1,000 developers, and uses it to study when, why, and how developers modify such code. Findings show developers spend little effort editing and often abandon AI outputs, highlighting the need for LLMs to infer intent from edits. Experiments reveal that while frontier models can generate edits that align with developer intent, they tend to over‑edit and revert changes; fine‑tuning improves performance but does not fully close the gap.
By Jenny T. Liang, Mihika Bairathi, Wayne Chi, Ameet Talwalkar, Nishant Subramani, Valerie Chen