Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 cited by

Aligning the Objective of LLM-based Program Repair

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 2404.08877 v5 pith:D7CDXJFA submitted 2024-04-13 cs.SE cs.CLcs.LG

Aligning the Objective of LLM-based Program Repair

classification cs.SE cs.CLcs.LG
keywords llmsrepairmethodsobjectiveprogramaligningbugscapability
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved
0 comments
read the original abstract

Large language models (LLMs) have achieved decent results on automated program repair (APR). However, the next token prediction training objective of decoder-only LLMs (e.g., GPT-4) is misaligned with the masked span prediction objective of current infilling-style methods, which impedes LLMs from fully leveraging pre-trained knowledge for program repair. In addition, while some LLMs can locate and repair bugs in certain functions using the related artifacts (e.g., test cases), existing methods still depend on statement-level fault localization methods to provide a list of buggy hunks for repair. This restriction hinders LLMs from exploring potential patches beyond the given locations. In this paper, we investigate a new approach to adapt LLMs to program repair. Our core insight is that LLM's APR capability can be greatly improved by simply aligning the output to their training objective and allowing them to refine the whole program without first identifying faulty statements. Based on this insight, we designed D4C, a straightforward prompting framework for APR. D4C can repair 180 bugs correctly in Defects4J, with each patch being sampled only 10 times. This surpasses the SOTA APR methods with perfect fault localization by 10% and reduces the patch sampling number by 90%. Our findings reveal that (1) objective alignment is crucial for fully exploiting LLM's pre-trained capability, and (2) replacing the traditional localize-buggy-hunks-then-repair workflow with direct debugging is more effective for LLM-based APR methods. Thus, we believe this paper introduces a new mindset for harnessing LLMs in APR.

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Forward citations

Cited by 3 Pith papers

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

  1. QiMeng-PRepair: Precise Code Repair via Edit-Aware Reward Optimization

    cs.SE 2026-04 unverdicted novelty 7.0

    PRepair mitigates LLM over-editing in code repair via Self-Breaking bug injection and EA-GRPO training, improving precision by up to 31.4% on the fix₁@1 metric.

  2. PAIChecker: Uncovering and Checking PR-Issue Misalignment in SWE-Bench-Like Benchmarks

    cs.SE 2026-07 conditional novelty 6.5

    About 13.6% of SWE-bench Verified tasks have PR–issue misalignment, and PAIChecker detects such cases at up to ~92% binary accuracy on held-out benchmarks.

  3. A Survey on Large Language Models for Code Generation

    cs.CL 2024-06 unverdicted novelty 3.0

    A systematic literature review that organizes recent work on LLMs for code generation into a taxonomy covering data curation, model advances, evaluations, ethics, environmental impact, and applications, with benchmark...