mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

SemAgent: A Semantics Aware Program Repair Agent

arXiv 2506.16650 ↗First posted 19 Jun 2025cs.SE cs.AI cs.MAcited by 9

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

Abstract (arXiv)

Large Language Models (LLMs) have shown impressive capabilities in downstream software engineering tasks such as Automated Program Repair (APR). In particular, there has been a lot of research on repository-level issue-resolution benchmarks such as SWE-Bench. Although there has been significant progress on this topic, we notice that in the process of solving such issues, existing agentic systems tend to hyper-localize on immediately suspicious lines of code and fix them in isolation, without a deeper understanding of the issue semantics, code semantics, or execution semantics. Consequently, many existing systems generate patches that overfit to the user issue, even when a more general fix is preferable. To address this limitation, we introduce SemAgent, a novel workflow-based procedure that leverages issue, code, and execution semantics to generate patches that are complete - identifying and fixing all lines relevant to the issue. We achieve this through a novel pipeline that (a) leverages execution semantics to retrieve relevant context, (b) comprehends issue-semantics via generalized abstraction, (c) isolates code-semantics within the context of this abstraction, and (d) leverages this understanding in a two-stage architecture: a repair stage that proposes fine-grained fixes, followed by a reviewer stage that filters relevant fixes based on the inferred issue-semantics. Our evaluations show that our methodology achieves a solve rate of 44.66% on the SWEBench-Lite benchmark beating all other workflow-based approaches, and an absolute improvement of 7.66% compared to our baseline, which lacks such deep semantic understanding. We note that our approach performs particularly well on issues requiring multi-line reasoning (and editing) and edge-case handling, suggesting that incorporating issue and code semantics into APR pipelines can lead to robust and semantically consistent repairs.

Key facts. Cited by 9 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 6 of its 10 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 19 Jun 2025.

Builds on

6 of 10 references.

Closest ancestors · 3

Same direction, newest first

  1. 2024SpecRover: Code Intent Extraction via LLMs5 Aug
  2. 2024Agentless: Demystifying LLM-based Software Engineering Agents1 Jul
  3. 2024SWE-agent: Agent-Computer Interfaces Enable Automated Software Engineering6 May

Other references · 3

  1. 2023SWE-bench: Can Language Models Resolve Real-World GitHub Issues?cited by 3,373
  2. 2020Unit Test Case Generation with Transformers and Focal Contextcited by 118
  3. 2024Code-Aware Prompting: A study of Coverage Guided Test Generation in Regression Setting using LLMcited by 64

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 14 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2025: 4; 2026: 5.

9 papers.

Similar, not cited

Close in wording, no citation either way

  1. 2025REFINE: Enhancing Program Repair Agents through Context-Aware Patch Refinement
  2. 2026Multi-Perspective Agentic Program Repair via Code Property Graphs and Temporal Execution Graphs
  3. 2026ARISE: A Repository-level Graph Representation and Toolset for Agentic Program Repair and Fault Localization
  4. 2025Understanding Automated Program Repair Agents Through the Lens of Traceability: An Empirical Study
  5. 2025HAFixAgent: History-Aware Program Repair Agent
  6. 2026AgenticRepair: Multi-Faceted Program Context Engineering for Agentic Vulnerability Repair
  7. 2026PhoenixRepair: Rethinking Repair Strategy Exploration in Software Agents
  8. 2026Refine After Generation: Toward Correct and Concise Patches in LLM-based Program Repair