AgentFL: Scaling LLM-based Fault Localization to Project-Level Context

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2403.16362v1
• Date: Mon, 25 Mar 2024 01:58:19 GMT
• Title: AgentFL: Scaling LLM-based Fault Localization to Project-Level Context
• Authors: Yihao Qin, Shangwen Wang, Yiling Lou, Jinhao Dong, Kaixin Wang, Xiaoling Li, Xiaoguang Mao,
• Abstract summary: This paper presents AgentFL, a multi-agent system based on ChatGPT for automated fault localization. By simulating the behavior of a human developer, AgentFL models the FL task as a three-step process, which involves comprehension, navigation, and confirmation. The evaluation on the widely used Defects4J-V1.2.0 benchmark shows that AgentFL can localize 157 out of 395 bugs within Top-1.
• Score: 11.147750199280813
• License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
• Abstract: Fault Localization (FL) is an essential step during the debugging process. With the strong capabilities of code comprehension, the recent Large Language Models (LLMs) have demonstrated promising performance in diagnosing bugs in the code. Nevertheless, due to LLMs' limited performance in handling long contexts, existing LLM-based fault localization remains on localizing bugs within a small code scope (i.e., a method or a class), which struggles to diagnose bugs for a large code scope (i.e., an entire software system). To address the limitation, this paper presents AgentFL, a multi-agent system based on ChatGPT for automated fault localization. By simulating the behavior of a human developer, AgentFL models the FL task as a three-step process, which involves comprehension, navigation, and confirmation. Within each step, AgentFL hires agents with diversified expertise, each of which utilizes different tools to handle specific tasks. Particularly, we adopt a series of auxiliary strategies such as Test Behavior Tracking, Document-Guided Search, and Multi-Round Dialogue to overcome the challenges in each step. The evaluation on the widely used Defects4J-V1.2.0 benchmark shows that AgentFL can localize 157 out of 395 bugs within Top-1, which outperforms the other LLM-based approaches and exhibits complementarity to the state-of-the-art learning-based techniques. Additionally, we confirm the indispensability of the components in AgentFL with the ablation study and demonstrate the usability of AgentFL through a user study. Finally, the cost analysis shows that AgentFL spends an average of only 0.074 dollars and 97 seconds for a single bug.

Related papers

• Embodied Agent Interface: Benchmarking LLMs for Embodied Decision Making [85.24399869971236]
  We aim to evaluate Large Language Models (LLMs) for embodied decision making. Existing evaluations tend to rely solely on a final success rate. We propose a generalized interface (Embodied Agent Interface) that supports the formalization of various types of tasks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-09T17:59:00Z)
• Enhancing Fault Localization Through Ordered Code Analysis with LLM Agents and Self-Reflection [8.22737389683156]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) offer promising improvements in fault localization by enhancing code comprehension and reasoning. We introduce LLM4FL, a novel LLM-agent-based fault localization approach that integrates SBFL rankings with a divide-and-conquer strategy. Our results demonstrate that LLM4FL outperforms AutoFL by 19.27% in Top-1 accuracy and surpasses state-of-the-art supervised techniques such as DeepFL and Grace.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-09-20T16:47:34Z)
• What's Wrong with Your Code Generated by Large Language Models? An Extensive Study [80.18342600996601]
  Large language models (LLMs) produce code that is shorter yet more complicated as compared to canonical solutions. We develop a taxonomy of bugs for incorrect codes that includes three categories and 12 sub-categories, and analyze the root cause for common bug types. We propose a novel training-free iterative method that introduces self-critique, enabling LLMs to critique and correct their generated code based on bug types and compiler feedback.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-07-08T17:27:17Z)
• AutoDetect: Towards a Unified Framework for Automated Weakness Detection in Large Language Models [95.09157454599605]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) are becoming increasingly powerful, but they still exhibit significant but subtle weaknesses. Traditional benchmarking approaches cannot thoroughly pinpoint specific model deficiencies. We introduce a unified framework, AutoDetect, to automatically expose weaknesses in LLMs across various tasks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-24T15:16:45Z)
• A Unified Debugging Approach via LLM-Based Multi-Agent Synergy [39.11825182386288]
  FixAgent is an end-to-end framework for unified debug through multi-agent synergy. It significantly outperforms state-of-the-art repair methods, fixing 1.25$times$ to 2.56$times$ bugs on the repo-level benchmark, Defects4J.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-04-26T04:55:35Z)
• Agent-FLAN: Designing Data and Methods of Effective Agent Tuning for Large Language Models [56.00992369295851]
  Open-sourced Large Language Models (LLMs) have achieved great success in various NLP tasks, however, they are still far inferior to API-based models when acting as agents. This paper delivers three key observations: (1) the current agent training corpus is entangled with both formats following and agent reasoning, which significantly shifts from the distribution of its pre-training data; (2) LLMs exhibit different learning speeds on the capabilities required by agent tasks; and (3) current approaches have side-effects when improving agent abilities by introducing hallucinations. We propose Agent-FLAN to effectively Fine-tune LANguage models for Agents.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-03-19T16:26:10Z)
• PPTC-R benchmark: Towards Evaluating the Robustness of Large Language Models for PowerPoint Task Completion [96.47420221442397]
  We construct adversarial user instructions by attacking user instructions at sentence, semantic, and multi-language levels. We test 3 closed-source and 4 open-source LLMs using a benchmark that incorporates robustness settings. We find that GPT-4 exhibits the highest performance and strong robustness in our benchmark.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-03-06T15:33:32Z)
• MatPlotAgent: Method and Evaluation for LLM-Based Agentic Scientific Data Visualization [86.61052121715689]
  MatPlotAgent is a model-agnostic framework designed to automate scientific data visualization tasks. MatPlotBench is a high-quality benchmark consisting of 100 human-verified test cases.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-02-18T04:28:28Z)
• Large Language Models for Test-Free Fault Localization [11.080712737595174]
  We propose a language model based fault localization approach that locates buggy lines of code without any test coverage information. We fine-tune language models with 350 million, 6 billion, and 16 billion parameters on small, manually curated corpora of buggy programs. Our empirical evaluation shows that LLMAO improves the Top-1 results over the state-of-the-art machine learning fault localization (MLFL) baselines by 2.3%-54.4%, and Top-5 results by 14.4%-35.6%.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-10-03T01:26:39Z)
• A Quantitative and Qualitative Evaluation of LLM-Based Explainable Fault Localization [12.80414941523501]
  AutoFL generates an explanation of the bug along with a suggested fault location. Experiments on 798 real-world bugs in Java and Python reveal AutoFL improves method-level acc@1 by up to 233.3% over baselines.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-08-10T10:26:55Z)
• FLAG: Finding Line Anomalies (in code) with Generative AI [18.612900041820875]
  FLAG is based on the lexical capabilities of generative AI, specifically, Large Language Models (LLMs) We use 121 benchmarks across C, Python and Verilog; with each benchmark containing a known security or functional weakness. FLAG can identify 101 of the defects and helps reduce the search space to 12-17% of source code.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-06-22T03:04:56Z)

This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.

This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.