On the need to perform comprehensive evaluations of automated program repair benchmarks: Sorald case study

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2508.15135v1
• Date: Thu, 21 Aug 2025 00:12:14 GMT
• Title: On the need to perform comprehensive evaluations of automated program repair benchmarks: Sorald case study
• Authors: Sumudu Liyanage, Sherlock A. Licorish, Markus Wagner, Stephen G. MacDonell,
• Abstract summary: Automated program repair (APR) tools aim to improve code quality by automatically addressing violations detected by static analysis profilers.<n>Previous research tends to evaluate APR tools only for their ability to clear violations.<n>This study evaluates Sorald, a state-of-the-art APR tool, as a proof of concept.
• Score: 4.968268396950843
• License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
• Abstract: In supporting the development of high-quality software, especially necessary in the era of LLMs, automated program repair (APR) tools aim to improve code quality by automatically addressing violations detected by static analysis profilers. Previous research tends to evaluate APR tools only for their ability to clear violations, neglecting their potential introduction of new (sometimes severe) violations, changes to code functionality and degrading of code structure. There is thus a need for research to develop and assess comprehensive evaluation frameworks for APR tools. This study addresses this research gap, and evaluates Sorald (a state-of-the-art APR tool) as a proof of concept. Sorald's effectiveness was evaluated in repairing 3,529 SonarQube violations across 30 rules within 2,393 Java code snippets extracted from Stack Overflow. Outcomes show that while Sorald fixes specific rule violations, it introduced 2,120 new faults (32 bugs, 2088 code smells), reduced code functional correctness--as evidenced by a 24% unit test failure rate--and degraded code structure, demonstrating the utility of our framework. Findings emphasize the need for evaluation methodologies that capture the full spectrum of APR tool effects, including side effects, to ensure their safe and effective adoption.

Related papers

• TraceCoder: A Trace-Driven Multi-Agent Framework for Automated Debugging of LLM-Generated Code [11.207330722400764]
  We present TraceCoder, a framework that emulates the observe-analyze-repair process of human experts.<n>The framework first instruments the code with diagnostic probes to capture fine-grained runtime traces.<n>It then conducts causal analysis on these traces to accurately identify the root cause of the failure.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-02-06T16:59:48Z)
• Enhancing Automated Program Repair via Faulty Token Localization and Quality-Aware Patch Refinement [15.978451025074962]
  TokenRepair is a novel two-level refinement framework for program repair.<n>It integrates internal reflection for localizing potentially faulty tokens with external feedback for quality-aware patch refinement.<n> TokenRepair achieves new state-of-the-art repair performance, correctly fixing 88 bugs on Defects4J 1.2 and 139 bugs on HumanEval-Java.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-11-22T10:05:26Z)
• Automated Repair of C Programs Using Large Language Models [0.0]
  This study explores the potential of Large Language Models (LLMs) in automating the repair of C programs.<n>We present a framework that integrates spectrum-based fault localization (SBFL), runtime feedback, and Chain-of-Thought-structured prompting into an autonomous repair loop.<n>Our approach achieves 44.93% repair accuracy, representing a 3.61% absolute improvement over strong state-of-the-art APR baselines.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-09-02T04:34:11Z)
• Automatic Reviewers Fail to Detect Faulty Reasoning in Research Papers: A New Counterfactual Evaluation Framework [55.078301794183496]
  We focus on a core reviewing skill that underpins high-quality peer review: detecting faulty research logic.<n>This involves evaluating the internal consistency between a paper's results, interpretations, and claims.<n>We present a fully automated counterfactual evaluation framework that isolates and tests this skill under controlled conditions.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-08-29T08:48:00Z)
• Automated Code Repair for C/C++ Static Analysis Alerts [1.260797434681533]
  Static analysis (SA) tools produce many diagnostic alerts indicating that source code in C or C++ may be defective.<n>This paper details the application of design, development, and performance testing to an APR tool we built that repairs C/C++ code associated with 3 categories of alerts produced by multiple SA tools.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-08-04T18:44:50Z)
• RePaCA: Leveraging Reasoning Large Language Models for Static Automated Patch Correctness Assessment [0.0]
  We introduce RePaCA, a novel static APCA technique that leverages Large Language Models (LLMs) specialized in thinking tasks.<n>Our approach achieves state-of-the-art performance, with 83.1% accuracy and an 84.8% F1-score.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-07-30T11:21:09Z)
• Refactoring $\neq$ Bug-Inducing: Improving Defect Prediction with Code Change Tactics Analysis [54.361900378970134]
  Just-in-time defect prediction (JIT-DP) aims to predict the likelihood of code changes resulting in software defects at an early stage.<n>Prior research has largely ignored code during both the evaluation and methodology phases, despite its prevalence.<n>We propose Code chAnge Tactics (CAT) analysis to categorize code and its propagation, which improves labeling accuracy in the JIT-Defects4J dataset by 13.7%.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-07-25T23:29:25Z)
• Do AI models help produce verified bug fixes? [62.985237003585674]
  Large Language Models are used to produce corrections to software bugs.<n>This paper investigates how programmers use Large Language Models to complement their own skills.<n>The results are a first step towards a proper role for AI and LLMs in providing guaranteed-correct fixes to program bugs.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-07-21T17:30:16Z)
• Specification-Guided Repair of Arithmetic Errors in Dafny Programs using LLMs [84.30534714651093]
  We present an innovative APR tool for Dafny, a verification-aware programming language.<n>We localize faults through a series of steps, which include using Hoare Logic to determine the state of each statement within the program.<n>We evaluate our approach using DafnyBench, a benchmark of real-world Dafny programs.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-07-04T15:36:12Z)
• Training Language Models to Generate Quality Code with Program Analysis Feedback [66.0854002147103]
  Code generation with large language models (LLMs) is increasingly adopted in production but fails to ensure code quality.<n>We propose REAL, a reinforcement learning framework that incentivizes LLMs to generate production-quality code.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-05-28T17:57:47Z)
• Leveraging Large Language Models for Efficient Failure Analysis in Game Development [47.618236610219554]
  This paper proposes a new approach to automatically identify which change in the code caused a test to fail. The method leverages Large Language Models (LLMs) to associate error messages with the corresponding code changes causing the failure. Our approach reaches an accuracy of 71% in our newly created dataset, which comprises issues reported by developers at EA over a period of one year.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-11T09:21:50Z)
• Hybrid Automated Program Repair by Combining Large Language Models and Program Analysis [12.7034916462208]
  Automated Program Repair (APR) has garnered significant attention due to its potential to streamline the bug repair process for human developers. This paper introduces an innovative APR approach called GIANTREPAIR. Based on this insight, GIANTREPAIR first constructs patch skeletons from LLM-generated patches to confine the patch space, and then generates high-quality patches tailored to specific programs.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-03T05:05:12Z)
• A Case Study of LLM for Automated Vulnerability Repair: Assessing Impact of Reasoning and Patch Validation Feedback [7.742213291781287]
  We present VRpilot, a vulnerability repair technique based on reasoning and patch validation feedback. Our results show that VRpilot generates, on average, 14% and 7.6% more correct patches than the baseline techniques on C and Java.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-05-24T16:29:48Z)
• FineWAVE: Fine-Grained Warning Verification of Bugs for Automated Static Analysis Tools [18.927121513404924]
  Automated Static Analysis Tools (ASATs) have evolved over time to assist in detecting bugs. Previous research efforts have explored learning-based methods to validate the reported warnings. We propose FineWAVE, a learning-based approach that verifies bug-sensitive warnings at a fine-grained granularity.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-03-24T06:21:35Z)

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.