Pith. sign in

REVIEW 1 cited by

Repairing Bugs in Python Assignments Using Large Language Models

Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.

SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event

T0 review · schema-true

One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.

pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp

arxiv 2209.14876 v1 pith:6DJB5QT3 submitted 2022-09-29 cs.SE cs.AI

classification cs.SEcs.AI
keywords assignmentspythonlargemistakesmmaprrepaircombiningengine
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal
0 comments
read the original abstract

Students often make mistakes on their introductory programming assignments as part of their learning process. Unfortunately, providing custom repairs for these mistakes can require a substantial amount of time and effort from class instructors. Automated program repair (APR) techniques can be used to synthesize such fixes. Prior work has explored the use of symbolic and neural techniques for APR in the education domain. Both types of approaches require either substantial engineering efforts or large amounts of data and training. We propose to use a large language model trained on code, such as Codex, to build an APR system -- MMAPR -- for introductory Python programming assignments. Our system can fix both syntactic and semantic mistakes by combining multi-modal prompts, iterative querying, test-case-based selection of few-shots, and program chunking. We evaluate MMAPR on 286 real student programs and compare to a baseline built by combining a state-of-the-art Python syntax repair engine, BIFI, and state-of-the-art Python semantic repair engine for student assignments, Refactory. We find that MMAPR can fix more programs and produce smaller patches on average.

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. Students' Feedback Requests and Interactions with the SCRIPT Chatbot: Do They Get What They Ask For?

    cs.AI 2025-07 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    In a 136-student trial, novice programmers' feedback requests to a purpose-built ChatGPT tutor followed a consistent sequence, and the tutor's responses aligned with requested feedback types in 75% of exchanges.

Pith tools