Resolving Build Conflicts via Example-Based and Rule-Based Program Transformations

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2507.19432v1
• Date: Fri, 25 Jul 2025 17:02:18 GMT
• Title: Resolving Build Conflicts via Example-Based and Rule-Based Program Transformations
• Abstract summary: Merge conflicts often arise when developers integrate changes from different software branches.<n>We introduce BUCOR (Build Conflict Resolver), a new conflict resolver.<n>BUCOR employs two complementary strategies: example-based transformation (BUCOR-E) and rule-based transformation (BUCOR-R)
• Score: 5.687389493863368
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: Merge conflicts often arise when developers integrate changes from different software branches. The conflicts can result from overlapping edits in programs (i.e., textual conflicts) or cause build and test errors (i.e., build and test conflicts). They degrade software quality and hinder programmer productivity. While several tools detect build conflicts, few offer meaningful support for resolving cases like those caused by method removal. To overcome limitations of existing tools, we introduce BUCOR (Build Conflict Resolver), a new conflict resolver. BUCOR first detects conflicts by comparing three versions related to a merging scenario: base b, left l, and right r. To resolve conflicts, it employs two complementary strategies: example-based transformation (BUCOR-E) and rule-based transformation (BUCOR-R). BUCOR-R applies predefined rules to handle common, well-understood conflicts. BUCOR-E mines branch versions (l and r) for exemplar edits applied to fix related build errors. From these examples, it infers and generalizes program transformation patterns to resolve more complex conflicts. We evaluated BUCOR on 88 real-world build conflicts spanning 21 distinct conflict types. BUCOR generated at least one solution for 65 cases and correctly resolved 43 conflicts. We observed that this hybrid approach--combining context-aware, example-based learning with structured, rule-based resolution--can effectively help resolve conflicts. Our research sheds light on future directions for more intelligent and automated merge tools.

Related papers

• CORE: Conflict-Oriented Reasoning for General Multimodal Manipulation Detection [56.64398465636452]
  generative AI has made multimodal fake news increasingly realistic and pervasive, posing severe threats to public trust and social stability.<n>We propose textbfConflict-textbfOriented textbfREasoning (textbfCORE) framework, an effective paradigm that learns to endows multimodal large language models (MLLMs) with explicit conflict-capturing capability.<n> CORE achieves robust and generalizable conflict detection, effectively and rapidly adapting to unseen manipulation types with a few samples or in even zero-shot settings.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-06-02T02:53:48Z)
• Rover: Context-aware Conflict Resolution with LLM [10.069365211450997]
  Code merging is a significant challenge, particularly in large-scale projects.<n>Existing solutions, including program analysis and machine learning, show promise but face critical limitations.<n>We introduce Rover, a novel conflict resolution system that integrates program analysis with large language models.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-05-17T06:21:40Z)
• Mitigating Context-Memory Conflicts in LLMs through Dynamic Cognitive Reconciliation Decoding [51.242997961841276]
  Large language models accumulate parametric knowledge through pre-training.<n> knowledge conflicts occur when outdated or incorrect parametric knowledge conflicts with external knowledge in the context.<n>Existing methods address knowledge conflicts through contrastive decoding, but in conflict-free scenarios, static approaches disrupt output distribution.<n>We propose Dynamic Cognitive Reconciliation Decoding (DCRD), to predict and context-memory conflicts.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-05-12T14:29:45Z)
• To Fuse or to Drop? Dual-Path Learning for Resolving Modality Conflicts in Multimodal Emotion Recognition [87.22988227382329]
  Multimodal emotion recognition (MER) benefits from combining text, audio, and vision, yet standard fusion often fails when modalities conflict.<n>We propose Dual-Path Conflict Resolution (DCR), a unified framework that learns when to fuse and when to drop modalities.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-05-06T13:11:33Z)
• Diagnosing Knowledge Conflict in Multimodal Long-Chain Reasoning [78.86309644343295]
  Multimodal large language models (MLLMs) in long chain-of-thought reasoning often fail when different knowledge sources provide conflicting signals.<n>We formalize these failures under a unified notion of knowledge conflict, distinguishing input-level objective conflict from process-level effective conflict.<n>Our findings provide a mechanism-level view of multimodal reasoning under knowledge conflict and enable principled diagnosis and control of long-CoT failures.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-02-16T07:10:44Z)
• That's Deprecated! Understanding, Detecting, and Steering Knowledge Conflicts in Language Models for Code Generation [55.78914774437411]
  Large language models (LLMs) behave when faced with discrepancies between their parametric knowledge and conflicting information contained in a prompt.<n>We propose a domain-agnostic framework for constructing and interpreting such conflicts.<n>We show that activation-level steering can achieve up to a textbf12.6% improvement in steering success over a random baseline.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-10-21T22:27:56Z)
• Leveraging LLMs for Semantic Conflict Detection via Unit Test Generation [1.201626478128059]
  We propose and integrate a new test generation tool based on Code Llama 70B into SMAT.<n>SMAT relies on generating and executing unit tests: if a test fails on the base version, passes on a developer's modified version, but fails again after merging with another developer's changes, a semantic conflict is indicated.<n>Results indicate that, although LLM-based test generation remains challenging and computationally expensive in complex scenarios, there is promising potential for improving semantic conflict detection.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-07-09T11:38:53Z)
• SwingArena: Competitive Programming Arena for Long-context GitHub Issue Solving [90.32201622392137]
  We present SwingArena, a competitive evaluation framework for Large Language Models (LLMs)<n>Unlike traditional static benchmarks, SwingArena models the collaborative process of software by pairing LLMs as iterations, who generate patches, and reviewers, who create test cases and verify the patches through continuous integration (CI) pipelines.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-05-29T18:28:02Z)
• Conflicts in Texts: Data, Implications and Challenges [58.03478157713084]
  Conflicts could reflect the complexity of situations, changes that need to be explained and dealt with, difficulties in data annotation, and mistakes in generated outputs.<n>This survey categorizes these conflicts into three key areas: (1) natural texts on the web, where factual inconsistencies, subjective biases, and multiple perspectives introduce contradictions; (2) human-annotated data, where annotator disagreements, mistakes, and societal biases impact model training; and (3) model interactions, where hallucinations and knowledge conflicts emerge during deployment.<n>We highlight key challenges and future directions for developing conflict-aware NLP systems that can reason over and reconcile conflicting information more effectively
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-04-28T04:24:01Z)
• When Disagreements Elicit Robustness: Investigating Self-Repair Capabilities under LLM Multi-Agent Disagreements [56.29265568399648]
  We argue that disagreements prevent premature consensus and expand the explored solution space.<n>Disagreements on task-critical steps can derail collaboration depending on the topology of solution paths.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-02-21T02:24:43Z)
• ECon: On the Detection and Resolution of Evidence Conflicts [56.89209046429291]
  The rise of large language models (LLMs) has significantly influenced the quality of information in decision-making systems. This study introduces a method for generating diverse, validated evidence conflicts to simulate real-world misinformation scenarios.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-05T07:41:17Z)
• CONGRA: Benchmarking Automatic Conflict Resolution [3.9910625211670485]
  ConGra is a benchmarking scheme designed to evaluate the performance of software merging tools. We build a large-scale evaluation dataset based on 44,948 conflicts from 34 real-world projects.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-09-21T12:21:41Z)
• AdaCAD: Adaptively Decoding to Balance Conflicts between Contextual and Parametric Knowledge [57.66282463340297]
  Knowledge conflict arises from discrepancies between information in the context of a large language model and the knowledge stored in its parameters.<n>We propose a fine-grained, instance-level approach called AdaCAD, which dynamically infers the weight of adjustment based on the degree of conflict.<n>We show that ADACAD consistently outperforms other decoding baselines with average QA accuracy gains of 14.21% (absolute) over a static contrastive baseline, and improves the factuality of summaries by 6.19 (AlignScore)
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-09-11T16:35:18Z)
• WizardMerge -- Save Us From Merging Without Any Clues [8.21089093466603]
  We present WizardMerge, an auxiliary tool that leverages merging results from Git to retrieve code block dependency on text and LLVM-IR level. The outcomes demonstrate that WizardMerge diminishes conflict merging time costs, achieving a 23.85% reduction.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-07-03T05:40:29Z)
• Detecting Semantic Conflicts with Unit Tests [5.273883263686449]
  Branching and merging are common practices in software development, increasing developer's productivity. Modern merge techniques can resolve textual conflicts automatically, but they fail when the conflict arises at the semantic level. We proposeSemAntic Merge, a semantic merge tool based on the automated generation of unit tests.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-10-03T19:36:28Z)
• Rehearsal: Simulating Conflict to Teach Conflict Resolution [54.32934135393982]
  Rehearsal is a system that allows users to rehearse conflicts with a believable simulated interlocutor. Users can utilize Rehearsal to practice handling a variety of predefined conflict scenarios. Rehearsal uses IRP to generate utterances grounded in conflict resolution theory.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-09-21T17:59:20Z)
• SCREWS: A Modular Framework for Reasoning with Revisions [58.698199183147935]
  We present SCREWS, a modular framework for reasoning with revisions. We show that SCREWS unifies several previous approaches under a common framework. We evaluate our framework with state-of-the-art LLMs on a diverse set of reasoning tasks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-09-20T15:59:54Z)
• ConE: A Concurrent Edit Detection Tool for Large ScaleSoftware Development [16.11297015618479]
  ConE proactively detects concurrent edits to help mitigate the problems caused by them. We present the results of ConE's deployment through early intervention techniques such as pull request notifications.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-01-16T22:55:44Z)

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.