跳到正文
研踪PaperTrail

YOUR RESEARCH, IN SIGHT

让下一篇重要论文,不再错过。

覆盖计算机全学科,以 AI 为快捷入口。关注方向、作者和关键词,把发现变成持续的研究积累。

部分采集异常
正在读取账号与研究记录…

全站更新概况

+1151新增论文
+896其中 AI 相关
+86已有论文修订
+100新增 AI 导读

arXiv 最近完成扫描:2026-11-06 20:30 · 全站最近入库:2026-11-06 13:12各信源进度 →

统计口径与数据新鲜度

统计 2026-11-05 20:37 — 2026-11-06 20:37(北京时间) · 点击数字查看对应简报;AI 相关包含在新增论文内。

最近完成检查:2026-11-06 20:30最近发现新增版本:2026-11-06 13:12库内论文最新更新时间:2026-11-06 02:59

每分钟刷新已保存的数据。空检查不代表采集异常;新收录可能包含历史论文。AI 导读按新增版本计数。

17,100 已收录论文14,661 AI 相关4,055 有修订112 HF 社区发现

浏览论文库

时间范围跟随排序:版本更新、本站收录或首次发表。最新收录可能包含历史论文。部分信源异常,查看状态 →

找到 1 篇论文 · 按版本更新时间排序上轮扫描起点 2026-11-06 20:24(北京时间)
新论文 · v1arXiv:2610.35650

FLOWSTEP: A Framework for Learning to Predict GitHub Actions Workflow STEPs

Jiangnan Huang, Bin Lin, Yutaro Kashiwa

Continuous Integration and Delivery (CI/CD) are fundamental to modern software development, yet configuring pipelines such as GitHub Actions (GHA) workflows remains complex and error-prone. Recent work has explored Transformer-based models for GHA workflow recommendation, but existing approaches typically model workflow steps as a single homogeneous generation task. This formulation overlooks a key distinction: reusable Actions are structured, ecosystem-level components, whereas project-specific Scripts encode local build, test, and deployment semantics. Consequently, current models struggle to capture the different forms of knowledge required for accurate workflow completion. In this work, we present FLOWSTEP, a framework for GHA workflow step completion that explicitly distinguishes between Action and Script generation. FLOWSTEP combines large language models (LLMs) with contrastive learning to better capture semantic relationships among workflow contexts, Actions, and Scripts. Evaluated on established benchmarks, FLOWSTEP improves end-to-end workflow step prediction accuracy from 38.23% to 51.09%. Beyond prediction accuracy, we further study whether LLM-as-a-judge can provide a more semantic evaluation of generated workflow steps. By comparing LLM-based assessments with human annotations, we find that the best-performing model configuration reaches substantial agreement with human ground truth (Krippendorff's alpha = 0.701), suggesting that LLM-as-a-judge can serve as a scalable complement to manual evaluation.

尚无 AI 解读,展示原文摘要

cs.SE
arXiv ↗PDF ↗