REVIEW 1 cited by
From Historical Patches to Repair Plans: Outcome-Conditioned Reasoning for Repository-Level 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
From Historical Patches to Repair Plans: Outcome-Conditioned Reasoning for Repository-Level Program Repair
read the original abstract
Repository-level automated program repair (APR) requires long-horizon reasoning over interdependent decisions. However, most LLM-based approaches reconstruct repair reasoning independently for each issue, failing to reuse successful patterns from prior repairs, even though real-world repositories contain many related issues with shared structure or constraints. Existing methods typically rely on forward exploration, which operates under outcome uncertainty, incurs substantial inference-time overhead, and can drift from the final correct patch. We propose Conditional Reasoning Distillation (ConRAD), which leverages in-repository resolved issues by reconstructing repair reasoning backward from verified patches and distilling outcome-consistent, stage-wise repair reasoning plans. Injected at inference time, these plans guide fault localization and patch generation, replacing open-ended exploration with constrained inference without fine-tuning or search. On SWE-Bench Lite, ConRAD improves Pass@1 by 10.4\% (GPT-4o), 8.6\% (DeepSeek-V3), and 10.3\% (GPT-5), demonstrating a scalable inference-time alternative to forward exploration for long-horizon APR.
Forward citations
Cited by 1 Pith paper
-
Bug Report Specification Refinement with Trajectory Guidance for Automated Program Repair
Refining bug reports with hierarchical evidence from an unverified agent trajectory plus repository review raises Pass@1 on SWE-Bench Lite from 41% to 59.67% (GPT-5-mini) and similarly for other agents.
discussion (0)
Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.