mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

Towards Automating Code Review Activities

arXiv 2101.02518 ↗First posted 7 Jan 2021cs.SEcited by 54

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Code reviews are popular in both industrial and open source projects. The benefits of code reviews are widely recognized and include better code quality and lower likelihood of introducing bugs. However, since code review is a manual activity it comes at the cost of spending developers' time on reviewing their teammates' code. Our goal is to make the first step towards partially automating the code review process, thus, possibly reducing the manual costs associated with it. We focus on both the contributor and the reviewer sides of the process, by training two different Deep Learning architectures. The first one learns code changes performed by developers during real code review activities, thus providing the contributor with a revised version of her code implementing code transformations usually recommended during code review before the code is even submitted for review. The second one automatically provides the reviewer commenting on a submitted code with the revised code implementing her comments expressed in natural language. The empirical evaluation of the two models shows that, on the contributor side, the trained model succeeds in replicating the code transformations applied during code reviews in up to 16% of cases. On the reviewer side, the model can correctly implement a comment provided in natural language in up to 31% of cases. While these results are encouraging, more research is needed to make these models usable by developers.

Key facts. Cited by 54 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). First posted on arXiv 7 Jan 2021.

Builds on

No reference list yet.

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 7 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2021: 2; 2022: 5; 2023: 8; 2024: 6; 2025: 19; 2026: 14.

54 papers.

Sort:

By area:

  1. 2022Automating Code Review Activities by Large-Scale Pre-trainingcited by 98
  2. 2025On the Use of Agentic Coding: An Empirical Study of Pull Requests on GitHubcited by 53
  3. 2023LLaMA-Reviewer: Advancing Code Review Automation with Large Language Models through Parameter-Efficient Fine-Tuningcited by 47
  4. 2022CoditT5: Pretraining for Source Code and Natural Language Editingcited by 45
  5. 2024Automatic Programming: Large Language Models and Beyondcited by 35
  6. 2024CodeAgent: Autonomous Communicative Agents for Code Reviewcited by 33
  7. 2021On Multi-Modal Learning of Editing Source Codecited by 25
  8. 2023Towards Generating Functionally Correct Code Edits from Natural Language Issue Descriptionscited by 14
  9. 2023Benchmarking Causal Study to Interpret Large Language Models for Source Codecited by 14
  10. 2025Migrating Code At Scale With LLMs At Googlecited by 14
  11. 2022Learning to Reduce False Positives in Analytic Bug Detectorscited by 12
  12. 2022CodeEditor: Learning to Edit Source Code with Pre-trained Modelscited by 12
38 more
  1. 2023Toward a Theory of Causation for Interpreting Neural Code Modelscited by 12
  2. 2023Enhancing Automated Program Repair through Fine-tuning and Prompt Engineeringcited by 10
  3. 2025Traceability and Accountability in Role-Specialized Multi-Agent LLM Pipelinescited by 10
  4. 2023Coeditor: Leveraging Contextual Changes for Multi-round Code Auto-editingcited by 9
  5. 2024CRScore: Grounding Automated Evaluation of Code Review Comments in Code Claims and Smellscited by 8
  6. 2025LAURA: Enhancing Code Review Generation with Context-Enriched Retrieval-Augmented LLMcited by 8
  7. 2024Automated User Story Generation with Test Case Specification Using Large Language Modelcited by 7
  8. 2024Prompting and Fine-tuning Large Language Models for Automated Code Review Comment Generationcited by 7
  9. 2025Evaluating Large Language Models for Code Reviewcited by 7
  10. 2022CommitBART: A Large Pre-trained Model for GitHub Commitscited by 6
  11. 2025Combining Large Language Models with Static Analyzers for Code Review Generationcited by 6
  12. 2025Retrieval-Augmented Code Review Comment Generationcited by 6
  13. 2026RovoDev Code Reviewer: A Large-Scale Online Evaluation of LLM-based Code Review Automation at Atlassiancited by 6
  14. 2021JavaBERT: Training a transformer-based model for the Java programming languagecited by 5
  15. 2025SecureReviewer: Enhancing Large Language Models for Secure Code Review through Secure-aware Fine-tuningcited by 5
  16. 2026HalluJudge: A Reference-Free Hallucination Detection for Context Misalignment in Code Review Automationcited by 5
  17. 2023Neuron Patching: Semantic-based Neuron-level Language Model Repair for Code Generationcited by 4
  18. 2024Leveraging Reviewer Experience in Code Review Comment Generationcited by 4
  19. 2025Hallucinations in Code Change to Natural Language Generation: Prevalence and Evaluation of Detection Metricscited by 4
  20. 2025Issue-Oriented Agent-Based Framework for Automated Review Comment Generationcited by 4
  21. 2026Code Review Agent Benchmarkcited by 4
  22. 2026SWE-Review: Closing the Loop on Issue Resolution with Agentic Code Reviewcited by 4
  23. 2025CodeReviewQA: The Code Review Comprehension Assessment for Large Language Modelscited by 3
  24. 2025Towards Practical Defect-Focused Automated Code Reviewcited by 3
  25. 2026Are We All Using Agents the Same Way? An Empirical Study of Core and Peripheral Developers Use of Coding Agentscited by 3
  26. 2026CR-Bench: Evaluating the Real-World Utility of AI Code Review Agentscited by 3
  27. 2026Measuring and Exploiting Contextual Bias in LLM-Assisted Security Code Reviewcited by 3
  28. 2026AgenticSCR: An Autonomous Agentic Secure Code Review for Immature Vulnerabilities Detectioncited by 2
  29. 2026Cross-Model LLM Code Review: Should you use Claude to review Codex or vice versa?cited by 2
  30. 2023Towards Automatically Addressing Self-Admitted Technical Debt: How Far Are We?cited by 1
  31. 2025SnipGen: A Mining Repository Framework for Evaluating LLMs for Codecited by 1
  32. 2025Leveraging Reward Models for Guiding Code Review Comment Generationcited by 1
  33. 2025Previously on... Automating Code Reviewcited by 1
  34. 2026Rethinking Code Review in the Age of AI: A Vision for Agentic Code Reviewcited by 1
  35. 2025Improving Automated Secure Code Reviews: A Synthetic Dataset for Code Vulnerability Flawscited by 0
  36. 2025On The Impact of Merge Request Deviations on Code Review Practicescited by 0
  37. 2025Fine-Tuning Multilingual Language Models for Code Review: An Empirical Study on Industrial C# Projectscited by 0
  38. 2025A Dataset and Preliminary Study of Using GPT-5 for Code-change Impact Analysiscited by 0

50 most cited of 54 All 54 (JSON)