SieveFL: Hierarchical Runtime-Aware Pruning for Scalable LLM-Based Fault Localization

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.13491v1
• Date: Wed, 13 May 2026 13:16:41 GMT
• Title: SieveFL: Hierarchical Runtime-Aware Pruning for Scalable LLM-Based Fault Localization
• Abstract summary: Automated fault localization requires connecting an observed test failure to the responsible method across thousands of candidates.<n>We present SieveFL, a five-stage hierarchical framework that resolves this tension through aggressive pre-LLM filtering.
• Score: 0.0
• License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
• Abstract: Automated fault localization requires connecting an observed test failure to the responsible method across thousands of candidates--a task that purely statistical approaches handle with limited precision and that LLMs cannot yet handle at full project scale due to prohibitive token cost and signal dilution. We present SieveFL, a five-stage hierarchical framework that resolves this tension through aggressive pre-LLM filtering. SieveFL converts a failing test into a natural-language failure description, uses dense vector retrieval to narrow the search to a small set of suspicious files, and then eliminates any method not executed during the failing test via JaCoCo runtime traces. Only the surviving candidates are passed to the LLM, which screens each method individually and re-ranks the confirmed suspects in a single comparative pass. We evaluate SieveFL on 395 bugs from Defects4J v1.2.0 using a mid-sized, openly available MoE model deployed on a commodity workstation (32 GB RAM, 8 GB GPU) via Ollama--no frontier APIs or datacenter hardware required. Treating 12 incomplete runs as failures, SieveFL achieves Top-1 accuracy of 41.8% (165/395 bugs) and an MRR of 0.469, outperforming the strongest prior agent-based baseline (AgentFL) by 2.1 pp in Top-1. Runtime pruning removes 79% of candidate methods and reduces input token consumption by 49%, while simultaneously improving ranking quality: Top-1 is preserved exactly and Top-3 through Top-10 improve by up to 2.4 pp. These results demonstrate that, with the right filtering architecture, capable fault localization does not require proprietary frontier models.

Related papers

• Free-Text Evaluation of LLMs for 5G Domain Knowledge and Fault Analysis using LLM-as-Judge [46.547776251310694]
  This paper evaluates 5G domain understanding and fault analysis in a free-text generation format.<n>We evaluate three lightweight LLMs, Claude-Haiku-4.5, GPT-5.4-Mini, and Gemini-3.1-Flash-Lite, on free-text 5G domain knowledge and fault-analysis tasks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-08-21T12:09:51Z)
• Measuring Five-Nines Reliability: Sample-Efficient LLM Evaluation in Saturated Benchmarks [45.86413490112477]
  Large language models (LLMs) are used in reliability-sensitive applications.<n>Estimateing rare failure probability with tight confidence bounds requires prohibitively large LLM inference sizes.<n>We propose to learn a sampling distribution concentrated on failure-prone inputs via the cross-entropy method.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-05-11T20:23:44Z)
• Correct Code, Vulnerable Dependencies: A Large Scale Measurement Study of LLM-Specified Library Versions [52.50730821321986]
  We present the first large-scale measurement study of version-level risk in large language models (LLMs)<n>We evaluate 10 LLMs on PinTrace, a curated benchmark of 1,000 Stack Overflow programming tasks.<n>Our findings reveal LLM version selection as a first-class, previously overlooked risk surface in LLM-based development.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-05-07T13:52:59Z)
• Resource-Efficient Iterative LLM-Based NAS with Feedback Memory [49.44875022114861]
  Neural Architecture Search (NAS) automates network design, but conventional methods demand substantial computational resources.<n>We propose a closed-loop pipeline leveraging large language models (LLMs) to iteratively generate, evaluate, and refine convolutional neural network architectures.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-03-12T16:00:22Z)
• RefineBench: Evaluating Refinement Capability of Language Models via Checklists [71.02281792867531]
  We evaluate two refinement modes: guided refinement and self-refinement.<n>In guided refinement, both proprietary LMs and large open-weight LMs can leverage targeted feedback to refine responses to near-perfect levels within five turns.<n>These findings suggest that frontier LMs require breakthroughs to self-refine their incorrect responses.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-11-27T07:20:52Z)
• Black-Box Test Code Fault Localization Driven by Large Language Models and Execution Estimation [7.040370156228408]
  We introduce a fully static, LLM-driven approach for system test code fault localization.<n>Our method uses a single failure execution log to estimate the test's execution trace.<n>We evaluate our technique at function, block, and line levels using an industrial dataset of faulty test cases.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-06-23T19:04:51Z)
• MCTS-Refined CoT: High-Quality Fine-Tuning Data for LLM-Based Repository Issue Resolution [18.314436803012434]
  The paper proposes MCTS-INE, an enhanced Monte Carlo Tree Search (MCTS)-based algorithm that dynamically validates and optimize intermediate reasoning steps.<n> Experiments on SWE-bench Lite and SWE-bench Verified demonstrate that LLMs fine-tuned with our CoT dataset achieve substantial improvements over baselines.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-06-15T05:42:01Z)
• LLM2: Let Large Language Models Harness System 2 Reasoning [65.89293674479907]
  Large language models (LLMs) have exhibited impressive capabilities across a myriad of tasks, yet they occasionally yield undesirable outputs.<n>We introduce LLM2, a novel framework that combines an LLM with a process-based verifier.<n>LLMs2 is responsible for generating plausible candidates, while the verifier provides timely process-based feedback to distinguish desirable and undesirable outputs.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-12-29T06:32:36Z)
• Order Matters! An Empirical Study on Large Language Models' Input Order Bias in Software Fault Localization [17.03610523319531]
  This study investigates the impact of input order and context size on Large Language Models (LLMs) performance.<n>Our results indicate a significant bias in order; Top-1 FL accuracy in Java projects drops from 57% to 20%, while in Python projects, it decreases from 38% to approximately 3% when we reverse the code order.<n>Breaking down inputs into smaller contexts helps reduce this bias, narrowing the performance gap in FL from 22% to 6% and then to just 1% on both benchmarks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-12-25T02:48:53Z)
• A Multi-Agent Approach to Fault Localization via Graph-Based Retrieval and Reflexion [8.22737389683156]
  Traditional fault localization techniques require extensive training datasets and high computational resources.<n>Recent advances in Large Language Models (LLMs) offer new opportunities by enhancing code understanding and reasoning.<n>We propose LLM4FL, a multi-agent fault localization framework that utilizes three specialized LLM agents.<n> evaluated on the Defects4J benchmark, which includes 675 faults from 14 Java projects, LLM4FL achieves an 18.55% improvement in Top-1 accuracy over AutoFL and 4.82% over SoapFL.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-09-20T16:47:34Z)
• 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)
• Large Language Models are Effective Text Rankers with Pairwise Ranking Prompting [65.00288634420812]
  Pairwise Ranking Prompting (PRP) is a technique to significantly reduce the burden on Large Language Models (LLMs) Our results are the first in the literature to achieve state-of-the-art ranking performance on standard benchmarks using moderate-sized open-sourced LLMs.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-06-30T11:32:25Z)
• LLMs as Factual Reasoners: Insights from Existing Benchmarks and Beyond [135.8013388183257]
  We propose a new protocol for inconsistency detection benchmark creation and implement it in a 10-domain benchmark called SummEdits. Most LLMs struggle on SummEdits, with performance close to random chance. The best-performing model, GPT-4, is still 8% below estimated human performance.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-05-23T21:50:06Z)

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.