The Patchwork Problem in LLM-Generated Code

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2607.08981v1
• Date: Thu, 09 Jul 2026 23:01:54 GMT
• Title: The Patchwork Problem in LLM-Generated Code
• Abstract summary: This paper formalizes structural coherence as consistency invariants over graph representations of repository artifacts.<n> Empirical evaluation across two frontier models reveals that the vast majority of structural failures evade type checking, testing, and SAST entirely.
• Score: 3.4562767039451674
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: LLM-generated code often compiles, passes tests, and appears correct, yet breaks once deployed. The root cause is frequently structural rather than logical. A generated endpoint references configuration keys never declared in the project, an import targets a package that does not exist in any registry, or a new route omits the authentication guard applied to every sibling endpoint. Each patch is locally valid but globally incoherent, and standard CI toolchains rarely surface these failures. As LLM-powered coding tools see widespread adoption, this blind spot poses a growing risk to software quality. We call this the \textbf{patchwork problem}. This paper formalizes structural coherence as consistency invariants over graph representations of repository artifacts, including import, call, dependency, configuration, schema, resource, control-flow, and routing graphs, and introduces an eight-category failure taxonomy distinguishing defects specific to LLM generation from those merely amplified by it. We present a hybrid verification framework that delegates to mature static analysis tools where they already excel and deploys purpose-built detectors for cross-cutting invariants underserved by existing toolchains, targeting provable constraint violations rather than heuristic pattern matching. Empirical evaluation across two frontier models under four prompting strategies reveals that the vast majority of structural failures evade type checking, testing, and SAST entirely, and that failure patterns diverge qualitatively between models in ways that challenge model-agnostic mitigation strategies. External validation on real-world AI-generated repositories confirms that these failures are not artifacts of controlled experimentation but are prevalent wherever LLMs write code with minimal human oversight.

Related papers

• RepoProbe: Benchmarking Architecture-Aware Repository Comprehension with Checklists [12.810164698494281]
  RepoProbe is a novel benchmark for evaluating repository-level code understanding.<n>We propose a Checklist-Based Verification Protocol that decomposes answers into atomic, verifiable facts.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-08-05T12:49:36Z)
• Beyond the Prompt: Jailbreaking Function-Calling LLMs via Simulated Moderation Traces [32.850551109913845]
  Jailbreak attacks remain a critical threat to the safe deployment of large language models (LLMs)<n>We show that this prompt-centric paradigm overlooks a structural vulnerability in stateful, function-calling environments.<n>We exploit this architectural flaw through SMT, a black-box attack framework based on Simulated Moderation Traces.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-07-01T06:08:07Z)
• Empirical Study for Structured Output Control in LLMs for Software Engineering [13.096361151631427]
  A semantically correct output that violates the expected format is, from the consuming system's perspective, indistinguishable from a wrong answer.<n>We present a systematic evaluation of structural reliability across four representative SE tasks.<n>We highlight the need for approaches that jointly ensure structural fidelity and semantic correctness in LLM-driven errors.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-06-08T12:13:58Z)
• VerifyMAS: Hypothesis Verification for Failure Attribution in LLM Multi-Agent Systems [79.51005192758262]
  Large language model-driven multi-agent systems excel at complex tasks.<n>However, unreliable agents remain a key bottleneck to system-level reliability.<n>We propose a hypothesis verification framework for agent failure attribution.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-05-17T14:09:35Z)
• Constraint Decay: The Fragility of LLM Agents in Backend Code Generation [9.659020624935687]
  Large Language Model (LLM) agents demonstrate strong performance in autonomous code generation under loose specifications.<n>Production-grade software requires strict adherence to structural constraints, such as architectural patterns, databases, and object-relational mappings.<n>We present a systematic study evaluating how well agents handle structural constraints in backend generation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-05-07T15:44:40Z)
• How LLMs Fail and Generalize in RTL Coding for Hardware Design? [56.361436215029045]
  We introduce a new error taxonomy grounded in problem solvability, inspired by cognitive theory.<n>Our taxonomy categorizes failures into syntactic, semantic, solvable functional, and unsolvable functional types.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-04-26T14:34:49Z)
• Dynamic analysis enhances issue resolution [53.50448142467294]
  DAIRA (Dynamic Analysis-enhanced Issue Resolution Agent) is an automated repair framework that embeds dynamic analysis into the agent's reasoning cycle.<n> Driven by a Test Tracing-Driven methodology, DAIRA utilizes lightweight monitors to extract critical runtime data.<n>When powered by Gemini 3 Flash Preview, DAIRA establishes a new state-of-the-art (SOTA) performance, achieving a 79.4% resolution rate on the SWE-bench Verified dataset.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-03-23T14:48:54Z)
• Architecture-Aware Multi-Design Generation for Repository-Level Feature Addition [53.50448142467294]
  RAIM is a multi-design and architecture-aware framework for repository-level feature addition.<n>It shifts away from linear patching by generating multiple diverse implementation designs.<n>Experiments on the NoCode-bench Verified dataset demonstrate that RAIM establishes a new state-of-the-art performance.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-03-02T12:50:40Z)
• ProbeLLM: Automating Principled Diagnosis of LLM Failures [89.44131968886184]
  We propose ProbeLLM, a benchmark-agnostic automated probing framework that elevates weakness discovery from individual failures to structured failure modes.<n>By restricting probing to verifiable test cases and leveraging tool-augmented generation and verification, ProbeLLM grounds failure discovery in reliable evidence.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-02-13T14:33:13Z)
• CompassVerifier: A Unified and Robust Verifier for LLMs Evaluation and Outcome Reward [50.97588334916863]
  We develop CompassVerifier, an accurate and robust lightweight verifier model for evaluation and outcome reward.<n>It demonstrates multi-domain competency spanning math, knowledge, and diverse reasoning tasks, with the capability to process various answer types.<n>We introduce VerifierBench benchmark comprising model outputs collected from multiple data sources, augmented through manual analysis of metaerror patterns to enhance CompassVerifier.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-08-05T17:55:24Z)
• Patch2QL: Discover Cognate Defects in Open Source Software Supply Chain With Auto-generated Static Analysis Rules [1.9591497166224197]
  We propose a novel technique for detecting cognate defects in OSS through the automatic generation of SAST rules. Specifically, it extracts key syntax and semantic information from pre- and post-patch versions of code. We have implemented a prototype tool called Patch2QL and applied it to fundamental OSS in C/C++.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-01-23T02:23:11Z)

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.