mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

Exploring Large Language Models in Resolving Environment-Related Crash Bugs: Localizing and Repairing

arXiv 2312.10448 ↗First posted 16 Dec 2023cs.SE cs.AI cs.CLcited by 1

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Software crash bugs cause unexpected program behaviors or even abrupt termination, thus demanding immediate resolution. However, resolving crash bugs can be challenging due to their complex root causes, which can originate from issues in the source code or external factors like third-party library dependencies. Large language models (LLMs) have shown promise in software engineering tasks. However, existing research predominantly focuses on the capability of LLMs to localize and repair code-related crash bugs, leaving their effectiveness in resolving environment-related crash bugs in real-world software unexplored. To fill this gap, we conducted the first comprehensive study to assess the capability of LLMs in resolving real-world environment-related crash bugs. We first systematically compare LLMs' performance in resolving code-related and environment-related crash bugs with varying levels of crash contextual information. Our findings reveal that localization is the primary challenge for resolving code-related crashes, while repair poses a greater challenge for environment-related crashes. Furthermore, we investigate the impact of different prompt strategies on improving the resolution of environment-related crash bugs, incorporating different prompt templates and multi-round interactions. Building on this, we further explore an advanced active inquiry prompting strategy leveraging the self-planning capabilities of LLMs. Based on these explorations, we propose IntDiagSolver, an interactive methodology designed to enable precise crash bug resolution through ongoing engagement with LLMs. Extensive evaluations of IntDiagSolver across multiple LLMs (including GPT-3.5, GPT-4, Claude, CodeLlama, DeepSeek-R1, and Qwen-3-Coder) demonstrate consistent improvements in resolution accuracy, with substantial enhancements ranging from 9.1% to 43.3% in localization and 9.1% to 53.3% in repair.

Key facts. Cited by 1 paper in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 31 of its 69 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 16 Dec 2023.

Builds on

31 of 69 references.

References · 31

  1. 2020Language Models are Few-Shot Learnerscited by 32,199
  2. 2022Chain-of-Thought Prompting Elicits Reasoning in Large Language Modelscited by 12,302
  3. 2023Tree of Thoughts: Deliberate Problem Solving with Large Language Modelscited by 3,155
  4. 2023Code Llama: Open Foundation Models for Codecited by 2,105
  5. 2023A Multitask, Multilingual, Multimodal Evaluation of ChatGPT on Reasoning, Hallucination, and Interactivitycited by 888
  6. 2023A Prompt Pattern Catalog to Enhance Prompt Engineering with ChatGPTcited by 612
  7. 2023Mathematical Capabilities of ChatGPTcited by 263
  8. 2023Self-collaboration Code Generation via ChatGPTcited by 255
  9. 2021Generated Knowledge Prompting for Commonsense Reasoningcited by 213
  10. 2023ClassEval: A Manually-Crafted Benchmark for Evaluating LLMs on Class-level Code Generationcited by 166
  11. 2022Synchromesh: Reliable code generation from pre-trained language modelscited by 156
  12. 2023Structured Chain-of-Thought Prompting for Code Generationcited by 136
19 more
  1. 2022Few-shot training LLMs for project-specific code-summarizationcited by 128
  2. 2023Self-planning Code Generation with Large Language Modelscited by 121
  3. 2023InferFix: End-to-End Program Repair with LLMscited by 113
  4. 2023An Analysis of the Automatic Bug Fixing Performance of ChatGPTcited by 108
  5. 2023No More Manual Tests? Evaluating and Improving ChatGPT for Unit Test Generationcited by 82
  6. 2023Prompt-Enhanced Software Vulnerability Detection Using ChatGPTcited by 51
  7. 2023Evaluating Instruction-Tuned Large Language Models on Code Comprehension and Generationcited by 49
  8. 2021Applying CodeBERT for Automated Program Repair of Java Simple Bugscited by 44
  9. 2019How Often Do Single-Statement Bugs Occur? The ManySStuBs4J Datasetcited by 35
  10. 2023Improving ChatGPT Prompt for Code Generationcited by 28
  11. 2023A study on Prompt Design, Advantages and Limitations of ChatGPT for Deep Learning Program Repaircited by 26
  12. 2021Automatic Program Repair with OpenAI's Codex: Evaluating QuixBugscited by 24
  13. 2023LLM for Test Script Generation and Migration: Challenges, Capabilities, and Opportunitiescited by 19
  14. 2021Fast Changeset-based Bug Localization with BERTcited by 13
  15. 2018Improving IR-Based Bug Localization with Context-Aware Query Reformulationcited by 11
  16. 2020Recommending Stack Overflow Posts for Fixing Runtime Exceptions using Failure Scenario Matchingcited by 9
  17. 2021IncBL: Incremental Bug Localizationcited by 4
  18. 2022Providing Real-time Assistance for Repairing Runtime Exceptions using Stack Overflow Postscited by 2
  19. 2023Knowledge-Based Version Incompatibility Detection for Deep Learningcited by 1

Built on by

Cited by year

Citing papers per year: 2024: 1.

1 paper.

Similar, not cited

Close in wording, no citation either way

  1. 2025Crash Report Enhancement with Large Language Models: An Empirical Study
  2. 2025Large Language Models for Fault Localization: An Empirical Study ↗
  3. 2026Large Language Models for Programming: Actually Fixing or Reimplementing Incorrect Code?
  4. 2026Rethinking Automated Program Repair: The Impact of Bug Complexity, Fault Localization, and LLM Cost-efficiency
  5. 2025Assessing the Impact of Code Changes on the Fault Localizability of Large Language Models
  6. 2025Exploring the Potential and Limitations of Large Language Models for Novice Program Fault Localization ↗
  7. 2025FeedbackEval: A Benchmark for Evaluating Large Language Models in Feedback-Driven Code Repair Tasks
  8. 2025Unlocking LLM Repair Capabilities Through Cross-Language Translation and Multi-Agent Refinement