Integrating Various Software Artifacts for Better LLM-based Bug Localization and Program Repair
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
LLMs have garnered considerable attention for their potential to streamline Automated Program Repair (APR). LLM-based approaches can either insert the correct code or directly generate patches when provided with buggy methods. However, most of LLM-based APR methods rely on a single type of software information, without fully leveraging different software artifacts. Despite this, many LLM-based approaches do not explore which specific types of information best assist in APR. Addressing this gap is crucial for advancing LLM-based APR techniques. We propose DEVLoRe to use issue content (description and message) and stack error traces to localize buggy methods, then rely on debug information in buggy methods and issue content and stack error to localize buggy lines and generate plausible patches which can pass all unit tests. The results show that while issue content is particularly effective in assisting LLMs with fault localization and program repair, different types of software artifacts complement each other. By incorporating different artifacts, DEVLoRe successfully locates 49.3% and 47.6% of single and non-single buggy methods and generates 56.0% and 14.5% plausible patches for the Defects4J v2.0 dataset, respectively. This outperforms current state-of-the-art APR methods. Furthermore, we re-implemented and evaluated our framework, demonstrating its effectiveness in its effectiveness in resolving 9 unique issues compared to other state-of-the-art frameworks using the same or more advanced models on SWE-bench Lite.We also discussed whether a leading framework for Python code can be directly applied to Java code, or vice versa. The source code and experimental results of this work for replication are available at https://github.com/XYZboom/DEVLoRe.
Key facts. Cited by 4 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 22 of its 55 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 5 Dec 2024.
Builds on
22 of 55 references.
References · 22
- 2024SWE-agent: Agent-Computer Interfaces Enable Automated Software Engineeringcited by 1,737
- 2024Agentless: Demystifying LLM-based Software Engineering Agentscited by 421
- 2024RepairAgent: An Autonomous, LLM-Based Agent for Program Repaircited by 232
- 2018SequenceR: Sequence-to-Sequence Learning for End-to-End Program Repaircited by 145
- 2024RepoGraph: Enhancing AI Software Engineering with Repository-level Code Graphcited by 91
- 2021CURE: Code-Aware Neural Machine Translation for Automatic Program Repaircited by 86
- 2024MarsCode Agent: AI-native Automated Bug Fixingcited by 71
- 2023Large Language Models for Test-Free Fault Localizationcited by 67
- 2019TBar: Revisiting Template-based Automated Program Repaircited by 65
- 2021A Syntax-Guided Edit Decoder for Neural Program Repaircited by 57
- 2023Copiloting the Copilots: Fusing Large Language Models with Completion Engines for Automated Program Repaircited by 55
- 2023A Quantitative and Qualitative Evaluation of LLM-Based Explainable Fault Localizationcited by 50
10 more
- 2023RepairLLaMA: Efficient Representations and Fine-Tuned Adapters for Program Repaircited by 50
- 2024AgentFL: Scaling LLM-based Fault Localization to Project-Level Contextcited by 47
- 2024A Deep Dive into Large Language Models for Automated Bug Localization and Repaircited by 39
- 2023GAMMA: Revisiting Template-based Automated Program Repair via Mask Predictioncited by 23
- 2024An Empirical Study on LLM-based Agents for Automated Bug Fixingcited by 23
- 2024Hybrid Automated Program Repair by Combining Large Language Models and Program Analysiscited by 22
- 2018Practical Program Repair via Bytecode Mutationcited by 19
- 2024CREF: An LLM-based Conversational Software Repair Framework for Programming Tutorscited by 15
- 2024The Fact Selection Problem in LLM-Based Program Repaircited by 12
- 2024Better Debugging: Combining Static Analysis and LLMs for Explainable Crashing Fault Localizationcited by 5
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2025: 1; 2026: 3.
4 papers.
- 2025DynaFix: Iterative Automated Program Repair Driven by Execution-Level Dynamic Informationcited by 3
- 2026Loc2Repair: A Framework for Evaluating the Impact of File-Level Issue Localization in Repo-Level LLM Repaircited by 3
- 2026Focus on What Matters: Fisher-Guided Adaptive Multimodal Fusion for Vulnerability Detectioncited by 0
- 2026LLMs Can See the Smoke but not the Fire: Evaluating Abductive Reasoning with Elenchoscited by 0
- 2026LLMs Can See the Smoke but not the Fire: Evaluating Abductive Reasoning with Elenchos14 Jul 2026
- 2026Loc2Repair: A Framework for Evaluating the Impact of File-Level Issue Localization in Repo-Level LLM Repair29 Jun 2026
- 2026Focus on What Matters: Fisher-Guided Adaptive Multimodal Fusion for Vulnerability Detection5 Jan 2026
- 2025DynaFix: Iterative Automated Program Repair Driven by Execution-Level Dynamic Information31 Dec 2025