跳到正文
研踪PaperTrail
← 研踪 PaperTrail

arXiv:2611.10837 · v1

Patch correctness in automated program repair: A five-dimensional evidence framework and cross-benchmark audit from classical repair to coding agents

首次提交 2026-11-08 00:30
版本更新 2026-11-08 00:30
雷达观测 2026-11-10 11:14
arXiv ↗PDF ↗

摘要

Tests guide automated program repair and determine which candidate patches are reported as successful. Repository-level coding agents extend this feedback loop by generating tests and revising code after observing execution results. This technical report introduces a five-dimensional evidence profile and reporting protocol to audit how test observations support patch-correctness claims across classical repair systems and coding agents. We assemble an audit dataset of 39 benchmark and evaluation artifacts: 32 primary empirical studies, one institutional technical audit, and six prior taxonomic baselines. We code the 33 primary contributions along five dimensions: test provenance and exposure, behavioral scope, oracle basis and dependence, execution integrity, and label adjudication. The central distinction separates checks visible during repair search from evidence reserved for final assessment. Four worked comparative audits show how changed candidate populations, oracle rules, or execution budgets alter reported detection rates. Additional tests can expose missed faults while rejecting valid alternatives or reducing correct-repair yield under a fixed budget. Repository-level audits separate issue reproduction from candidate-patch discrimination and distinguish automated discrepancy detection from requirements-based adjudication. An evidence matrix links each coded decision to supporting passages and records shared benchmark ancestry. We specify a reporting protocol for repair benchmarks and maintenance pipelines that retains uncertain judgments and records validation cost alongside fault detection and valid-patch retention.

作者备注:Technical report. 24 pages, 2 figures, 6 tables. Dataset and evidence matrix available at https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.23639376

AI 论文解读

基于摘要 · 非全文审阅

此版本尚未生成 AI 解读。解读由后台任务生成并按论文版本保存,登录后共享已有结果。

版本差异

目前只收录了一个版本。收录下一版后,可以对照标题、作者、分类和摘要。

观测到的版本

相邻记录可能跳过中间版本;首次发现 v2 及以上也会标为版本更新。

v1 · 2026-11-08 00:30 · 最新观测版本

Patch correctness in automated program repair: A five-dimensional evidence framework and cross-benchmark audit from classical repair to coding agents

Tests guide automated program repair and determine which candidate patches are reported as successful. Repository-level coding agents extend this feedback loop by generating tests and revising code after observing execution results. This technical report introduces a five-dimensional evidence profile and reporting protocol to audit how test observations support patch-correctness claims across classical repair systems and coding agents. We assemble an audit dataset of 39 benchmark and evaluation artifacts: 32 primary empirical studies, one institutional technical audit, and six prior taxonomic baselines. We code the 33 primary contributions along five dimensions: test provenance and exposure, behavioral scope, oracle basis and dependence, execution integrity, and label adjudication. The central distinction separates checks visible during repair search from evidence reserved for final assessment. Four worked comparative audits show how changed candidate populations, oracle rules, or execution budgets alter reported detection rates. Additional tests can expose missed faults while rejecting valid alternatives or reducing correct-repair yield under a fixed budget. Repository-level audits separate issue reproduction from candidate-patch discrimination and distinguish automated discrepancy detection from requirements-based adjudication. An evidence matrix links each coded decision to supporting passages and records shared benchmark ancestry. We specify a reporting protocol for repair benchmarks and maintenance pipelines that retains uncertain judgments and records validation cost alongside fault detection and valid-patch retention.

查看此版本解读 →查看此版本原文 ↗