SciWalker is a framework that automatically synthesizes scientific coding problems by sampling operator chains from scientific library interfaces and using execution feedback to refine generated problem statements, solutions, and tests. It produces 8,178 high‑quality problems across five scientific domains and 32 subdomains, and training a large language model with these problems improves its scientific coding accuracy by nearly 10 percentage points. The approach combines structured workflow composition with verification and quality review to enable scalable, scientifically grounded task generation.
By Chenxi Li, Wenxuan Zeng, Yun Luo, Fangchen Yu, Peng Ye, Yu Cheng, Jun Zhang
arXiv:2606. 01286v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: The rapid progress of frontier large language models has led to widespread benchmark saturation, limiting the ability of existing datasets to differentiate model capabilities or provide useful training signal.
By Yangzhen Wu, Aaron J. Li, Wenjie Ma, Li Cao, Ziheng Zhou, Mert Cemri, Shu Liu, Yuran Xiu, Chenxiao Yan, Haikun Zhao, Bin Yu, Ion Stoica, Dawn Song
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
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.
By Hantian Ding, Chloe Bi, Jiacheng Zhu, John Yang, Matt Deitke, Pengcheng Yin, Zijian Wang, Rui Hou
WEAVE is a framework that converts verified pull‑request histories into executable, dependency‑structured tasks for code agents. It organizes related PRs into bounded directed acyclic graphs (DAGs) using repository‑calibrated typed change loci, creating unified tasks that reflect real‑world code evolution. The framework also introduces Graph Credit, a deterministic, test‑grounded metric that measures partial progress consistent with dependencies, providing dense, verifiable rewards for reinforcement learning.
By Weihao Li, Zihang Xu, Zhongqiu Wang, Songwei Yu, Wenqiang Zhu, Yuechen Luo, Jingxuan Xu, Yanan Wu, Haoyang Huang, Ken Deng
arXiv:2606. 10087v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Pre-training on raw code teaches syntax but provides sparse signal for diverse real-world task formats.
By Ankit Gupta, Aditya Prasad, Rameswar Panda
arXiv:2608. 09277v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Verified code generation asks a large language model (LLM) to generate both an executable program and a machine-checkable proof that the program meets a formal specification, promising software that is correct by construction.
By Zenan Li, Ziran Yang, Peiyang Song, Zhaoyu Li, Kaiyu Yang
arXiv:2607. 18260v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: We introduce FindStatBench, an execution benchmark for evaluating large language models on combinatorial code synthesis.
By Soham Dan
The paper introduces RobustTests, a framework that improves reinforcement learning for code generation by synthesizing test cases from faulty code and refining rewards with a dense, stepwise function. It uses validator agents and behavioral clustering to filter out invalid or redundant tests, and incorporates pass‑rate‑based rewards to counter hallucination noise. Experiments on CodeContests and LiveCodeBench show that fine‑tuning Qwen3‑32B with RobustTests yields a 3% absolute performance gain over baseline methods.
By Yiwen Zhang, Xiaodong Yan, Zhenyu Huang, Deng Zhao, Liang Jiang, Qing Cui, Zujie Wen, Zhiqiang Zhang, Jun Zhou
arXiv:2603. 19329v3 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) can generate plausible code but offer limited guarantees of correctness.
By Zenan Li, Ziran Yang, Deyuan He, Haoyu Zhao, Andrew Zhao, Shange Tang, Kaiyu Yang, Aarti Gupta, Zhendong Su, Chi Jin
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
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