# SWE-Bench+: Enhanced Coding Benchmark for LLMs

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2410.06992 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2410.06992/

## Key facts

- Cited by 99 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- First posted on arXiv 9 Oct 2024.

## Built on by (most cited first, 30 of 99)

- [Memory in the Age of AI Agents](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2512.13564/) (2025)
- [SWE-Bench Pro: Can AI Agents Solve Long-Horizon Software Engineering Tasks?](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2509.16941/) (2025)
- [Survey on Evaluation of LLM-based Agents](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2503.16416/) (2025)
- [A Survey of Self-Evolving Agents: What, When, How, and Where to Evolve on the Path to Artificial Super Intelligence](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2507.21046/) (2025)
- [R2E-Gym: Procedural Environments and Hybrid Verifiers for Scaling Open-Weights SWE Agents](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2504.07164/) (2025)
- [SWE-rebench: An Automated Pipeline for Task Collection and Decontaminated Evaluation of Software Engineering Agents](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2505.20411/) (2025)
- [TRAIL: Trace Reasoning and Agentic Issue Localization](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2505.08638/) (2025)
- [Understanding Software Engineering Agents: A Study of Thought-Action-Result Trajectories](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2506.18824/) (2025)
- [SEC-bench: Automated Benchmarking of LLM Agents on Real-World Software Security Tasks](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2506.11791/) (2025)
- [WebGen-Bench: Evaluating LLMs on Generating Interactive and Functional Websites from Scratch](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2505.03733/) (2025)
- [Reinforcement Learning from Human Feedback](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2504.12501/) (2025)
- [Code as Agent Harness](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2605.18747/) (2026)
- [UTBoost: Rigorous Evaluation of Coding Agents on SWE-Bench](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2506.09289/) (2025)
- [Agentic Software Engineering: Foundational Pillars and a Research Roadmap](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2509.06216/) (2025)
- [TDD-Bench Verified: Can LLMs Generate Tests for Issues Before They Get Resolved?](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2412.02883/) (2024)
- [SlopCodeBench: Benchmarking How Coding Agents Degrade Over Long-Horizon Iterative Tasks](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2603.24755/) (2026)
- [SWE-Bench++: A Framework for the Scalable Generation of Software Engineering Benchmarks from Open-Source Repositories](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2512.17419/) (2025)
- [Otter: Generating Tests from Issues to Validate SWE Patches](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2502.05368/) (2025)
- [GSO: Challenging Software Optimization Tasks for Evaluating SWE-Agents](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2505.23671/) (2025)
- [SWE-Synth: Synthesizing Verifiable Bug-Fix Data to Enable Large Language Models in Resolving Real-World Bugs](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2504.14757/) (2025)
- [AI Scientists Fail Without Strong Implementation Capability](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2506.01372/) (2025)
- [debug-gym: A Text-Based Environment for Interactive Debugging](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2503.21557/) (2025)
- [SWE-Universe: Scale Real-World Verifiable Environments to Millions](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2602.02361/) (2026)
- [Self-Improvements in Modern Agentic Systems: A Survey](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2607.13104/) (2026)
- [Evaluating LLM Metrics Through Real-World Capabilities](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2505.08253/) (2025)
- [Does SWE-Bench-Verified Test Agent Ability or Model Memory?](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2512.10218/) (2025)
- [Saving SWE-Bench: A Benchmark Mutation Approach for Realistic Agent Evaluation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2510.08996/) (2025)
- [From Code Foundation Models to Agents and Applications: A Comprehensive Survey and Practical Guide to Code Intelligence](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2511.18538/) (2025)
- [Evolutionary Perspectives on the Evaluation of LLM-Based AI Agents: A Comprehensive Survey](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2506.11102/) (2025)
- [SecureVibeBench: Benchmarking Secure Vibe Coding of AI Agents via Reconstructing Vulnerability-Introducing Scenarios](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2509.22097/) (2025)

## Abstract (arXiv)

Large Language Models (LLMs) in Software Engineering (SE) can offer assistance for coding. To facilitate a rigorous evaluation of LLMs in practical coding contexts, Carlos et al. introduced the SWE-bench dataset, which comprises 2,294 real-world GitHub issues and their corresponding pull requests, collected from 12 widely used Python repositories. Several impressive LLM-based toolkits recently are developed and evaluated on this dataset. However, a systematic evaluation of the quality of SWE-bench remains missing. In this paper, we addressed this gap by presenting an empirical analysis of the SWE-bench dataset. We conducted a manual screening of instances where SWEAgent + GPT-4 successfully resolved issues by comparing the model-generated patches with the actual pull requests. SWE-Agent+GPT-4 was at the top of SWE-bench leaderboard during the time of our study. Our analysis reveals some critical issues with the SWE-bench dataset: 1) 32.67% of the successful patches involve cheating as the solutions were directly provided in the issue report or the comments. We refer to as solution leakage problem. 2) 31.08% of the passed patches are suspicious patches due to weak test cases, i.e., the tests were not adequate to verify the correctness of a patch. When we filtered out these problematic issues, the resolution rate of SWE-Agent+GPT-4 dropped from 12.47% to 3.97%. We also observed that the same data quality issues also exist in the two variants of SWE-bench, i.e., SWE-bench Lite and SWE-Bench Verified. In addition, over 94% of the issues were created before LLM's knowledge cutoff dates, posing potential data leakage issues.