arXiv:2608. 19799v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Software increasingly functions as part of the scientific instrument itself, making failures in scientific code capable of compromising not only program behavior but also the evidence underlying scientific conclusions.
By Zhipeng Xu, Jiahao Lu, Yining Zheng, Yuxin Wang, Xipeng Qiu
arXiv:2609.08149v1 Announce Type: new
Abstract: SWE-Bench Pro has emerged as a standard benchmark for evaluating software engineering agents on challenging repository-level tasks. However, our analys...
By Pujun Zheng, Zixin Shang, Shufan Jiang, Wenhui Tian, Dongsheng Zhu, Zerun Ma, Dingbo Yuan, Qi Zhang
SWE‑Gate is a new repository‑level benchmark that evaluates software engineering agents on both functional correctness and review‑derived acceptance constraints. It creates 303 repair instances from real pull‑request review comments across 75 open‑source Python projects, providing separate functional and constraint tests along with compliant and non‑compliant patches. Experiments with four LLM backends show that while 644 repairs pass functional tests, 221 fail to meet the review constraints, highlighting a gap between functional success and full repair compliance.
By Xin He, Yanlin Wang, Mingwei Liu, Jiachi Chen, Hongyu Zhang, Guanbin Li
arXiv:2609.19134v1 Announce Type: new
Abstract: Scientific code repositories encode decades of human knowledge in executable models, methods, and tools. Yet fragmented toolchains, implicit domain con...
By Hejia Geng, Zesen Huang, Haoyang Li, Wenbin Li, Koutian Wu, Zihan Zhou, Yuanbo Pang, Weihao Liu, Zigong Xu, Zhiping Li, Zongzheng Zhang, Chuanfei Dong, Jiankai Sun, Tianzhe Zheng, Fengyu Xie, Yue Ma, Yueheng Shi, Tong Xie, Zonglin Di, Xianrong Liu, Qucheng Gao, Yimin Liu, Jiaming Pan, Sheng Huang, Xiao-Han Ma, Lanqing Yuan, Zhenlin Zhu, Ziang Liu, Ziyang Xu, Junkai Wang, Kangkai Liang, Jiayi Xian, Zehong Zhao, Liuwei Xu, Jingxu Xie, Peijin Zhang, Qiang Gao, Chengyi Xing, Zhe Zhao, Xi Wang, Yaopeng Xing, Xing Meng, Zhenfei Yin, Yingcheng Wu, Ling Yang
The paper introduces AutoMat, a benchmark designed to test large language model (LLM) coding agents on their ability to reproduce claims from computational materials science. AutoMat presents three challenges: reconstructing underspecified procedures, navigating specialized toolchains, and assessing whether the evidence supports a claim. Experiments show that current LLM agents achieve low success rates, with the best setting reaching only 53%, and failures stem mainly from incomplete procedures, methodological deviations, and execution fragility.
By Ziyang Huang, Yi Cao, Ali K. Shargh, Jing Luo, Ruidong Mei, Mohd Zaki, Zhan Liu, Wyatt Bunstine, William Jurayj, Somdatta Goswami, Tyrel McQueen, Michael Shields, Jaafar El-Awady, Paulette Clancy, Benjamin Van Durme, Nicholas Andrews, William Walden, Daniel Khashabi
arXiv:2608. 09072v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Large language model-powered coding agents are increasingly used to modify existing code repositories, for example, by adding features or fixing bugs.
By Xin Zhou, Chun Yong Chong, Kisub Kim, Yun Peng, Rui Shu, Zihan Wu, Xu Han, Guowen Yuan, Zeyang Zhuang, Jounghoon Kim, Jeongjin Ju, Seongmin Ju, Taein Yoon, David Lo