A Single Patch Is Not Enough: Deterministic Fusion of Repair Candidates

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2607.01597v1
• Date: Thu, 02 Jul 2026 01:53:17 GMT
• Title: A Single Patch Is Not Enough: Deterministic Fusion of Repair Candidates
• Abstract summary: We propose PatchFusion, a deterministic atomic evidence fusion approach for candidate patches.<n>On PatchFuseBench, PatchFusion solves 426/500 bugs on SWE-bench Verified and 236/300 on SWE-bench Multilingual.<n>On these complementary multi-source pools, cross-candidate evidence recovers more correct patches than the test-based and LLM-based selectors.
• Score: 7.8378908014951705
• License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
• Abstract: Modern LLM coding agents are commonly evaluated using pass@k, but developers typically apply a single final patch in real-world settings. This pass@k-to-pass@1 gap is a post-generation problem: a candidate patch pool may contain a correct patch, but the system must decide which one to suggest to developers. Existing post-generation approaches mainly rank whole candidates, filter them with tests, or query an LLM judge, but none deterministically reuse shared edit-atom evidence to both select and construct the final patch. Thus, we propose PatchFusion, a deterministic atomic evidence fusion approach for candidate patches that consults no test outcome at decision time. PatchFusion first fuses whole-diff agreement into a repair neighborhood, selects an auditable representative, and then applies evidence-constrained fusion (ECF) to retain repeated edit atoms and prune unsupported parts. To evaluate this setting, we build PatchFuseBench, a fixed-pool benchmark covering SWE-bench Verified, SWE-bench Multilingual, and Defects4J candidate patches. On PatchFuseBench, PatchFusion solves 426/500 bugs on SWE-bench Verified and 236/300 on SWE-bench Multilingual, and reaches 87/371 plausible patches on Defects4J, outperforming every matched candidate-pool selector on all three. PatchFusion recovers 41 and 27 bugs that no single source solves (30 and 18 more over the best single source). Ablation studies show that ECF adds +5/+6/+9 solved bugs by recovering in-pool repairs that selection misses, with no observed regression, and that PatchFusion's gains remain stable as candidate pools are resampled. On these complementary multi-source pools, cross-candidate evidence recovers more correct patches than the test-based and LLM-based selectors we evaluate, at orders-of-magnitude lower cost, reaching within 96.2% and 89.7% of the candidate-reachable ceiling on the two SWE-bench benchmarks.

Related papers

• Independent Patch Verification for Coding Agents with a Bidirectional Reconstruct-and-Verify Framework [49.16055123488827]
  coding agents powered by large language models can now generate code patches directly from bug reports.<n>No mechanism independently verifies whether it truly resolves the reported problem.<n>We propose RETRACE, a training-free post-generation verification framework.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-08-09T22:59:13Z)
• Beyond Fail-to-Pass: Iterative Hardening of Co-Generated Bug Reproduction Tests and Fixes [55.114939648705395]
  Large language models (LLMs) have made automated program repair increasingly practical for real-world bugs.<n>Bug reproduction tests (BRTs) help close this gap by turning a bug report into an executable, bug-specific signal.<n>We propose CoHarden, a co-generation framework that uses the Lax signal as an in-loop convergence criterion.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-07-22T07:30:07Z)
• Are Benchmark Tests Strong Enough? Mutation-Guided Diagnosis and Augmentation of Regression Suites [49.16055123488827]
  Insufficiently strong test suites can admit plausible yet semantically incorrect patches, inflating reported success rates.<n>We introduce STING, a framework for targeted test augmentation that uses semantically altered program variants as diagnostic stressors.<n>STING produces 1,014 validated tests spanning 211 instances and increases patch-region line and branch coverage by 10.8% and 9.5%.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-04-02T01:13:40Z)
• Historian: Reducing Manual Validation in APR Benchmarking via Evidence-Based Assessment [0.19853810231896352]
  We present Historian, a framework that leverages Large Language Models to perform multi-reference comparisons against a knowledge base of historically validated patches.<n>In leave-one-tool-out evaluation, Historian achieves 95.0% coverage with 88.4% accuracy, reducing manual validation to 5% of patches.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-02-28T13:41:29Z)
• Outrunning LLM Cutoffs: A Live Kernel Crash Resolution Benchmark for All [57.23434868678603]
  Live-kBench is an evaluation framework for self-evolving benchmarks that scrapes and evaluates agents on freshly discovered kernel bugs.<n> kEnv is an agent-agnostic crash-resolution environment for kernel compilation, execution, and feedback.<n>Using kEnv, we benchmark three state-of-the-art agents, showing that they resolve 74% of crashes on the first attempt.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-02-02T19:06:15Z)
• Outcome-Conditioned Reasoning Distillation for Resolving Software Issues [49.16055123488827]
  We present an Outcome-Conditioned Reasoning Distillation(O-CRD) framework that uses resolved in-repository issues with verified patches as supervision.<n>Starting from a historical fix, the method reconstructs a stage-wise repair trace backward from the verified outcome.<n>On SWE-Bench Lite, this approach increases Pass@1 by 10.4% with GPT-4o, 8.6% with DeepSeek-V3, and 10.3% with GPT-5.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-01-30T18:25:39Z)
• Nexus: Execution-Grounded Multi-Agent Test Oracle Synthesis [57.40527331817245]
  Test oracle generation in non-regression testing is a longstanding challenge in software engineering.<n>We introduce Nexus, a novel multi-agent framework to address this challenge.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-10-30T12:20:25Z)
• REFINE: Enhancing Program Repair Agents through Context-Aware Patch Refinement [12.995571513415905]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) have recently shown strong potential in automatic program repair (APR)<n>LLMs often struggle to produce correct fixes due to limited understanding of code context and over-reliance on incomplete test suites.<n>We propose a novel patch refinement framework, Refine, that systematically transforms Draft Patches into correct ones.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-10-04T00:34:32Z)
• Eigen-1: Adaptive Multi-Agent Refinement with Monitor-Based RAG for Scientific Reasoning [53.45095336430027]
  We develop a unified framework that combines implicit retrieval and structured collaboration.<n>On Humanity's Last Exam (HLE) Bio/Chem Gold, our framework achieves 48.3% accuracy.<n>Results on SuperGPQA and TRQA confirm robustness across domains.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-09-25T14:05:55Z)
• Are "Solved Issues" in SWE-bench Really Solved Correctly? An Empirical Study [18.117047833029073]
  Most popular benchmarks for automated issue solving are SWE-bench and its human-filtered subset SWE-bench Verified.<n>This paper presents an in-depth empirical study of the correctness of plausible patches generated by three state-of-the-art issue-solving tools evaluated on SWE-bench Verified.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-03-19T14:02:21Z)
• RAP-Gen: Retrieval-Augmented Patch Generation with CodeT5 for Automatic Program Repair [75.40584530380589]
  We propose a novel Retrieval-Augmented Patch Generation framework (RAP-Gen) RAP-Gen explicitly leveraging relevant fix patterns retrieved from a list of previous bug-fix pairs. We evaluate RAP-Gen on three benchmarks in two programming languages, including the TFix benchmark in JavaScript, and Code Refinement and Defects4J benchmarks in Java.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-09-12T08:52:56Z)
• Keep the Conversation Going: Fixing 162 out of 337 bugs for $0.42 each using ChatGPT [13.632199062382746]
  Automated Program Repair (APR) aims to automatically generate patches for buggy programs.<n>Recent APR work has been focused on leveraging modern Large Language Models (LLMs) to directly generate patches for APR.<n>We propose ChatRepair, the first fully automated conversation-driven APR approach.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-04-01T20:57:33Z)
• Test-based Patch Clustering for Automatically-Generated Patches Assessment [21.051652050359852]
  Overfitting happens when a patch is run and the test suite does not reveal any error, but the patch actually does not fix the underlying bug or it introduces a new defect that is not covered by the test suite. Our work aims to minimize the number of plausible patches that programmers have to review, thereby reducing the time required to find a correct patch. We introduce a novel light-weight test-based patch clustering approach called xTestCluster, which clusters patches based on their dynamic behavior.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-07-22T13:39:27Z)

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.