mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

From Knowledge to Noise: CTIM-Rover and the Pitfalls of Episodic Memory in Software Engineering Agents

arXiv 2505.23422 ↗First posted 29 May 2025cs.SE cs.AIcited by 4

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

Abstract (arXiv)

We introduce CTIM-Rover, an AI agent for Software Engineering (SE) built on top of AutoCodeRover (Zhang et al., 2024) that extends agentic reasoning frameworks with an episodic memory, more specifically, a general and repository-level Cross-Task-Instance Memory (CTIM). While existing open-source SE agents mostly rely on ReAct (Yao et al., 2023b), Reflexion (Shinn et al., 2023), or Code-Act (Wang et al., 2024), all of these reasoning and planning frameworks inefficiently discard their long-term memory after a single task instance. As repository-level understanding is pivotal for identifying all locations requiring a patch for fixing a bug, we hypothesize that SE is particularly well positioned to benefit from CTIM. For this, we build on the Experiential Learning (EL) approach ExpeL (Zhao et al., 2024), proposing a Mixture-Of-Experts (MoEs) inspired approach to create both a general-purpose and repository-level CTIM. We find that CTIM-Rover does not outperform AutoCodeRover in any configuration and thus conclude that neither ExpeL nor DoT-Bank (Lingam et al., 2024) scale to real-world SE problems. Our analysis indicates noise introduced by distracting CTIM items or exemplar trajectories as the likely source of the performance degradation.

Key facts. Cited by 4 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Placed in Software engineering coding agents, one of 16 directions in LLM agents and tool use. Builds on 14 of its 25 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 29 May 2025.

Builds on

14 of 25 references.

Closest ancestors · 3

Same direction, newest first

  1. 2025SWE-smith: Scaling Data for Software Engineering Agents30 Apr
  2. 2024SWE-agent: Agent-Computer Interfaces Enable Automated Software Engineering6 May
  3. 2024Executable Code Actions Elicit Better LLM Agents1 Feb

Other references · 11

  1. 2022ReAct: Synergizing Reasoning and Acting in Language Modelscited by 8,695
  2. 2021Evaluating Large Language Models Trained on Codecited by 8,320
  3. 2016Overcoming catastrophic forgetting in neural networkscited by 4,787
  4. 2023Reflexion: Language Agents with Verbal Reinforcement Learningcited by 4,276
  5. 2018HotpotQA: A Dataset for Diverse, Explainable Multi-hop Question Answeringcited by 3,754
  6. 2023SWE-bench: Can Language Models Resolve Real-World GitHub Issues?cited by 3,373
  7. 2022WebShop: Towards Scalable Real-World Web Interaction with Grounded Language Agentscited by 1,251
  8. 2020ALFWorld: Aligning Text and Embodied Environments for Interactive Learningcited by 1,205
  9. 2021CodeT5: Identifier-aware Unified Pre-trained Encoder-Decoder Models for Code Understanding and Generationcited by 906
  10. 2024Continual Learning of Large Language Models: A Comprehensive Surveycited by 234
  11. 2025Learn-by-interact: A Data-Centric Framework for Self-Adaptive Agents in Realistic Environmentscited by 95

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 14 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2025: 2; 2026: 2.

4 papers.

Similar, not cited

Close in wording, no citation either way

  1. 2026Structurally Aligned Subtask-Level Memory for Software Engineering Agents
  2. 2026Towards Structured, State-Aware, and Execution-Grounded Reasoning for Software Engineering Agents
  3. 2026MemGovern: Enhancing Code Agents through Learning from Governed Human Experiences
  4. 2026PROJECTMEM: A Local-First, Event-Sourced Memory and Judgment Layer for AI Coding Agents
  5. 2026DAEDALUS: Bootstrapping Agent Memory from Self-Generated Tasks
  6. 2025Prometheus: Towards Long-Horizon Codebase Navigation for Repository-Level Problem Solving
  7. 2026Yet Even Less Is Even Better For Agentic, Reasoning, and Coding LLMs
  8. 2026Coupling Planning with Episodic Memory in LLM Agents for Software Issue Resolution