mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

Static Code Analysis in the AI Era: An In-depth Exploration of the Concept, Function, and Potential of Intelligent Code Analysis Agents

arXiv 2310.08837 ↗First posted 13 Oct 2023cs.SEcited by 12

On the map: LLM agents and tool use → Software engineering coding agents

Abstract (arXiv)

The escalating complexity of software systems and accelerating development cycles pose a significant challenge in managing code errors and implementing business logic. Traditional techniques, while cornerstone for software quality assurance, exhibit limitations in handling intricate business logic and extensive codebases. To address these challenges, we introduce the Intelligent Code Analysis Agent (ICAA), a novel concept combining AI models, engineering process designs, and traditional non-AI components. The ICAA employs the capabilities of large language models (LLMs) such as GPT-3 or GPT-4 to automatically detect and diagnose code errors and business logic inconsistencies. In our exploration of this concept, we observed a substantial improvement in bug detection accuracy, reducing the false-positive rate to 66% from the baseline's 85%, and a promising recall rate of 60.8%. However, the token consumption cost associated with LLMs, particularly the average cost for analyzing each line of code, remains a significant consideration for widespread adoption. Despite this challenge, our findings suggest that the ICAA holds considerable potential to revolutionize software quality assurance, significantly enhancing the efficiency and accuracy of bug detection in the software development process. We hope this pioneering work will inspire further research and innovation in this field, focusing on refining the ICAA concept and exploring ways to mitigate the associated costs.

Key facts. Cited by 12 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Placed in Software engineering coding agents, one of 16 directions in LLM agents and tool use. Builds on 12 of its 35 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 13 Oct 2023.

Builds on

12 of 35 references.

References · 12

  1. 2020Language Models are Few-Shot Learnerscited by 32,199
  2. 2022ReAct: Synergizing Reasoning and Acting in Language Modelscited by 8,355
  3. 2023Code Llama: Open Foundation Models for Codecited by 2,105
  4. 2020CodeBERT: A Pre-Trained Model for Programming and Natural Languagescited by 1,286
  5. 2022Text Embeddings by Weakly-Supervised Contrastive Pre-trainingcited by 1,216
  6. 2022A Survey on In-context Learningcited by 717
  7. 2023Multi-Agent Collaboration: Harnessing the Power of Intelligent LLM Agentscited by 329
  8. 2017Real Time Image Saliency for Black Box Classifierscited by 246
  9. 2021A Survey of Human-in-the-loop for Machine Learningcited by 214
  10. 2018The Best of Both Worlds: Combining Recent Advances in Neural Machine Translationcited by 101
  11. 2019Pythia: AI-assisted Code Completion Systemcited by 54
  12. 2020Big Code != Big Vocabulary: Open-Vocabulary Models for Source Codecited by 53

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 7 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2024: 2; 2025: 7; 2026: 3.

12 papers.

Similar, not cited

Close in wording, no citation either way

  1. 2024MarsCode Agent: AI-native Automated Bug Fixing
  2. 2026XAI for Coding Agent Failures: Transforming Raw Execution Traces into Actionable Insights
  3. 2025Beyond Final Code: A Process-Oriented Error Analysis of Software Development Agents in Real-World GitHub Scenarios
  4. 2024Evaluating Software Development Agents: Patch Patterns, Code Quality, and Issue Complexity in Real-World GitHub Scenarios
  5. 2026A Large-Scale Empirical Study of Quality Assurance Practices and Gaps in AI Agents
  6. 2026CR-Bench: Evaluating the Real-World Utility of AI Code Review Agents
  7. 2025StaAgent: An Agentic Framework for Testing Static Analyzers
  8. 2026Grounding AI Agents in Contracts: An Empirical Evaluation of Spec-Driven Test Generation