Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 cited by

Hybrid Automated Program Repair by Combining Large Language Models and Program Analysis

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 2406.00992 v2 pith:XHKBT6YN submitted 2024-06-03 cs.SE

classification cs.SE
keywords patchesmethodspatchapproachautomatedbugsgiantrepairllm-generated
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal
0 comments
read the original abstract

Automated Program Repair (APR) has garnered significant attention due to its potential to streamline the bug repair process for human developers. Recently, LLM-based APR methods have shown promise in repairing real-world bugs. However, existing APR methods often utilize patches generated by LLMs without further optimization, resulting in reduced effectiveness due to the lack of program-specific knowledge. Furthermore, the evaluations of these APR methods have typically been conducted under the assumption of perfect fault localization, which may not accurately reflect their real-world effectiveness. To address these limitations, this paper introduces an innovative APR approach called GIANTREPAIR. Our approach leverages the insight that LLM-generated patches, although not necessarily correct, offer valuable guidance for the patch generation process. Based on this insight, GIANTREPAIR first constructs patch skeletons from LLM-generated patches to confine the patch space, and then generates high-quality patches tailored to specific programs through context-aware patch generation by instantiating the skeletons. To evaluate the performance of our approach, we conduct two large-scale experiments. The results demonstrate that GIANTREPAIR not only effectively repairs more bugs (an average of 27.78% on Defects4J v1.2 and 23.40% on Defects4J v2.0) than using LLM-generated patches directly, but also outperforms state-of-the-art APR methods by repairing at least 42 and 7 more bugs under perfect and automated fault localization scenarios, respectively.

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 3 Pith papers

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

  1. AdaptAgent: A Multi-agent, Domain-Guided Reasoning Framework for Code Adaptation

    cs.SE 2026-08 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    A multi-agent LLM pipeline that plans code adaptations using summarized intent, domain checklists, and sibling-method context outperforms single-shot prompting and repair baselines on Java adaptation examples.

  2. Leveraging GPT-4 for Vulnerability-Witnessing Unit Test Generation

    cs.SE 2025-06 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    GPT-4 generated syntactically valid vulnerability-witnessing unit tests in 66.5% of runs, semantically valid tests in 7.5%, and useful templates in 68.5%, suggesting a semi-automated role.

  3. Accelerating Automatic Program Repair with Dual Retrieval-Augmented Fine-Tuning and Patch Generation on Large Language Models

    cs.SE 2025-07 conditional novelty 4.0 of 10

    A dual-retrieval, threshold-gated, full-parameter fine-tuned code LLM (SelRepair) reports state-of-the-art exact-match patch generation on Tufano and VulRepair benchmarks.

Pith tools