Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 cited by

Where's the Bug? Attention Probing for Scalable Fault Localization

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 2502.13966 v2 pith:FAOCMQOS submitted 2025-02-19 cs.SE cs.LG

Where's the Bug? Attention Probing for Scalable Fault Localization

classification cs.SE cs.LG
keywords llmslocalizationfaultpromptingacrossattentionchallengingcode
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved
0 comments
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN
read the original abstract

Ensuring code correctness remains a challenging problem even as large language models (LLMs) become increasingly capable at code-related tasks. While LLM-based program repair systems can propose bug fixes using only a user's bug report, their effectiveness is fundamentally limited by their ability to perform fault localization (FL), a challenging problem for both humans and LLMs. Existing FL approaches rely on executable test cases, require training on costly and often noisy line-level annotations, or demand resource-intensive LLMs. In this paper, we present Bug Attention Probe (BAP), a method which learns state-of-the-art fault localization without any direct localization labels, outperforming traditional FL baselines and prompting of large-scale LLMs. We evaluate our approach across a variety of code settings, including real-world Java bugs from the standard Defects4J dataset as well as seven other datasets which span a diverse set of bug types and languages. Averaged across all eight datasets, BAP improves by 34.6% top-1 accuracy compared to the strongest baseline and 93.4% over zero-shot prompting GPT-4o. BAP is also significantly more efficient than prompting, outperforming large open-weight models at a small fraction of the computational cost.

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. Hierarchical Fault Detection and Diagnosis for Transformer Architectures

    cs.SE 2026-04 unverdicted novelty 7.0

    DEFault++ delivers automated hierarchical fault detection, categorization into 12 transformer-specific types, and root-cause diagnosis among 45 mechanisms on a new benchmark of 3,739 mutated instances, with AUROC >0.9...

  2. Hierarchical Fault Detection and Diagnosis for Transformer Architectures

    cs.SE 2026-04 unverdicted novelty 6.0

    DEFault++ applies hierarchical learning with a Fault Propagation Graph to detect, localize, and diagnose faults in transformers, improving F1 to 0.826-0.909 and developer repair accuracy from 57.1% to 83.3% on a new b...

  3. FLARE: Fine-Grained Diagnostic Feedback for LLM Code Refinement

    cs.SE 2026-06 unverdicted novelty 4.0

    FLARE combines a diagnostic model for line-level bug localization with top-k candidate search to improve LLM code refinement, reporting gains of 1.72-7.42% on LiveCodeBench and BigCodeBench.