Identifying Patch Correctness in Test-Based Program Repair
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Test-based automatic program repair has attracted a lot of attention in recent years. However, the test suites in practice are often too weak to guarantee correctness and existing approaches often generate a large number of incorrect patches. To reduce the number of incorrect patches generated, we propose a novel approach that heuristically determines the correctness of the generated patches. The core idea is to exploit the behavior similarity of test case executions. The passing tests on original and patched programs are likely to behave similarly while the failing tests on original and patched programs are likely to behave differently. Also, if two tests exhibit similar runtime behavior, the two tests are likely to have the same test results. Based on these observations, we generate new test inputs to enhance the test suites and use their behavior similarity to determine patch correctness. Our approach is evaluated on a dataset consisting of 139 patches generated from existing program repair systems including jGenProg, Nopol, jKali, ACS and HDRepair. Our approach successfully prevented 56.3% of the incorrect patches to be generated, without blocking any correct patches.
Key facts. Cited by 17 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). First posted on arXiv 28 Jun 2017.
Builds on
No reference list yet.
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2021: 2; 2022: 1; 2023: 3; 2024: 0; 2025: 3; 2026: 8.
17 papers.
Sort:
By area:
- 2025Evaluating Agent-based Program Repair at Googlecited by 35
- 2025Understanding Automated Program Repair Agents Through the Lens of Traceability: An Empirical Studycited by 16
- 2023Towards Generating Functionally Correct Code Edits from Natural Language Issue Descriptionscited by 14
- 2023Invalidator: Automated Patch Correctness Assessment via Semantic and Syntactic Reasoningcited by 11
- 2023RunBugRun -- An Executable Dataset for Automated Program Repaircited by 11
- 2022Is this Change the Answer to that Problem? Correlating Descriptions of Bug and Code Changes for Evaluating Patch Correctnesscited by 7
- 2021Predicting Patch Correctness Based on the Similarity of Failing Test Casescited by 4
- 2026ExecCritic: Learn to Test, Test to Improve for Coding Agentscited by 3
- 2026PatchBench: Evaluating AI Agents for Vulnerability Patchingcited by 2
- 2025RePaCA: Leveraging Reasoning Large Language Models for Static Automated Patch Correctness Assessmentcited by 1
- 2026Coupling Planning with Episodic Memory in LLM Agents for Software Issue Resolutioncited by 1
- 2026BenchShield: Formal Model-Backed Instrumentation for Reward Integrity in LLM-Agent Evaluation Infrastructurecited by 1
5 more
- 2026Groundability, Not Scale Alone: When Weak Reviewers Can Audit Strong Coding Agentscited by 1
- 2021Exploring Plausible Patches Using Source Code Embeddings in JavaScriptcited by 0
- 2026Understanding Agent-Based Patching of Compiler Missed Optimizationscited by 0
- 2026From Approval to Execution: Reconstruction-Aware Repair Analysis for LLM-Agent Softwarecited by 0
- 2026P2Patch: Exploit-Guided Vulnerability Repaircited by 0
- 2026P2Patch: Exploit-Guided Vulnerability Repair14 Oct 2026
- 2026Groundability, Not Scale Alone: When Weak Reviewers Can Audit Strong Coding Agents1 Oct 2026
- 2026From Approval to Execution: Reconstruction-Aware Repair Analysis for LLM-Agent Software22 Sep 2026
- 2026BenchShield: Formal Model-Backed Instrumentation for Reward Integrity in LLM-Agent Evaluation Infrastructure10 Sep 2026
- 2026ExecCritic: Learn to Test, Test to Improve for Coding Agents8 Sep 2026
- 2026PatchBench: Evaluating AI Agents for Vulnerability Patching3 Sep 2026
- 2026Coupling Planning with Episodic Memory in LLM Agents for Software Issue Resolution7 Aug 2026
- 2026Understanding Agent-Based Patching of Compiler Missed Optimizations2 Jul 2026
- 2025RePaCA: Leveraging Reasoning Large Language Models for Static Automated Patch Correctness Assessment30 Jul 2025
- 2025Understanding Automated Program Repair Agents Through the Lens of Traceability: An Empirical Study10 Jun 2025
- 2025Evaluating Agent-based Program Repair at Google13 Jan 2025
- 2023Towards Generating Functionally Correct Code Edits from Natural Language Issue Descriptions7 Apr 2023
5 more
- 2023RunBugRun -- An Executable Dataset for Automated Program Repair3 Apr 2023
- 2023Invalidator: Automated Patch Correctness Assessment via Semantic and Syntactic Reasoning3 Jan 2023
- 2022Is this Change the Answer to that Problem? Correlating Descriptions of Bug and Code Changes for Evaluating Patch Correctness8 Aug 2022
- 2021Predicting Patch Correctness Based on the Similarity of Failing Test Cases28 Jul 2021
- 2021Exploring Plausible Patches Using Source Code Embeddings in JavaScript31 Mar 2021
- 2025Evaluating Agent-based Program Repair at Googlecited by 35
- 2025Understanding Automated Program Repair Agents Through the Lens of Traceability: An Empirical Studycited by 16
- 2026ExecCritic: Learn to Test, Test to Improve for Coding Agentscited by 3
- 2026Coupling Planning with Episodic Memory in LLM Agents for Software Issue Resolutioncited by 1
- 2026BenchShield: Formal Model-Backed Instrumentation for Reward Integrity in LLM-Agent Evaluation Infrastructurecited by 1
- 2026Groundability, Not Scale Alone: When Weak Reviewers Can Audit Strong Coding Agentscited by 1
- 2026From Approval to Execution: Reconstruction-Aware Repair Analysis for LLM-Agent Softwarecited by 0
- 2026Groundability, Not Scale Alone: When Weak Reviewers Can Audit Strong Coding Agents1 Oct 2026
- 2026From Approval to Execution: Reconstruction-Aware Repair Analysis for LLM-Agent Software22 Sep 2026
- 2026BenchShield: Formal Model-Backed Instrumentation for Reward Integrity in LLM-Agent Evaluation Infrastructure10 Sep 2026
- 2026ExecCritic: Learn to Test, Test to Improve for Coding Agents8 Sep 2026
- 2026Coupling Planning with Episodic Memory in LLM Agents for Software Issue Resolution7 Aug 2026
- 2025Understanding Automated Program Repair Agents Through the Lens of Traceability: An Empirical Study10 Jun 2025
- 2025Evaluating Agent-based Program Repair at Google13 Jan 2025
- 2023Towards Generating Functionally Correct Code Edits from Natural Language Issue Descriptionscited by 14
- 2023Invalidator: Automated Patch Correctness Assessment via Semantic and Syntactic Reasoningcited by 11
- 2023RunBugRun -- An Executable Dataset for Automated Program Repaircited by 11
- 2022Is this Change the Answer to that Problem? Correlating Descriptions of Bug and Code Changes for Evaluating Patch Correctnesscited by 7
- 2021Predicting Patch Correctness Based on the Similarity of Failing Test Casescited by 4
- 2026PatchBench: Evaluating AI Agents for Vulnerability Patchingcited by 2
- 2021Exploring Plausible Patches Using Source Code Embeddings in JavaScriptcited by 0
- 2026Understanding Agent-Based Patching of Compiler Missed Optimizationscited by 0
- 2026P2Patch: Exploit-Guided Vulnerability Repaircited by 0
- 2026P2Patch: Exploit-Guided Vulnerability Repair14 Oct 2026
- 2026PatchBench: Evaluating AI Agents for Vulnerability Patching3 Sep 2026
- 2026Understanding Agent-Based Patching of Compiler Missed Optimizations2 Jul 2026
- 2023Towards Generating Functionally Correct Code Edits from Natural Language Issue Descriptions7 Apr 2023
- 2023RunBugRun -- An Executable Dataset for Automated Program Repair3 Apr 2023
- 2023Invalidator: Automated Patch Correctness Assessment via Semantic and Syntactic Reasoning3 Jan 2023
- 2022Is this Change the Answer to that Problem? Correlating Descriptions of Bug and Code Changes for Evaluating Patch Correctness8 Aug 2022
- 2021Predicting Patch Correctness Based on the Similarity of Failing Test Cases28 Jul 2021
- 2021Exploring Plausible Patches Using Source Code Embeddings in JavaScript31 Mar 2021