Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 cited by

ThinkRepair: Self-Directed Automated 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 2407.20898 v1 pith:NBXITZXR submitted 2024-07-30 cs.SE

classification cs.SE
keywords thinkrepairbugsfixingllmsphaseprogramautomateddefects4j
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

0 comments
read the original abstract

Though many approaches have been proposed for Automated Program Repair (APR) and indeed achieved remarkable performance, they still have limitations in fixing bugs that require analyzing and reasoning about the logic of the buggy program. Recently, large language models (LLMs) instructed by prompt engineering have attracted much attention for their powerful ability to address many kinds of tasks including bug-fixing. However, the quality of the prompt will highly affect the ability of LLMs and manually constructing high-quality prompts is a costly endeavor. To address this limitation, we propose a self-directed LLM-based automated program repair, ThinkRepair, with two main phases: collection phase and fixing phase. The former phase automatically collects various chains of thoughts that constitute pre-fixed knowledge by instructing LLMs with the Chain-of-Thought (CoT) prompt. The latter phase targets fixing a bug by first selecting examples for few-shot learning and second automatically interacting with LLMs, optionally appending with feedback of testing information. Evaluations on two widely studied datasets (Defects4J and QuixBugs) by comparing ThinkRepair with 12 SOTA APRs indicate the priority of ThinkRepair in fixing bugs. Notably, ThinkRepair fixes 98 bugs and improves baselines by 27%-344.4% on Defects4J V1.2. On Defects4J V2.0, ThinkRepair fixes 12-65 more bugs than the SOTA APRs. Additionally, ThinkRepair also makes a considerable improvement on QuixBugs (31 for Java and 21 for Python at most).

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID 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. FVRuleLearner: Operator-Level Reasoning Tree (Op-Tree)-Based Rules Learning for Formal Verification

    cs.AR 2026-03 unverdicted novelty 7.0 of 10

    FVRuleLearner retrieves learned operator-level reasoning rules to boost the functional correctness of LLM-generated SystemVerilog assertions by roughly 30 percentage points over simple prompting baselines.

  2. Recovering Wasted Compute in Autoresearch Agents

    cs.AI 2026-08 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    Adding shared debugging memory, hyperparameter tuning enforcement, and Thompson-sampling backtracking to tree-search agents recovers wasted compute and improves MLE-bench scores with the same language model.

  3. Your Fix Is My Exploit: Enabling Comprehensive DL Library API Fuzzing with Large Language Models

    cs.SE 2025-01 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    An LLM-driven fuzzer extracts transferable edge cases from API source-code checks and covers more TensorFlow/PyTorch APIs while finding 37 bugs.

Pith tools