mlsanityData to 13 Oct 2026

A Survey of LLM-based Automated Program Repair: Taxonomies, Design Paradigms, and Applications

arXiv 2506.23749 ↗First posted 30 Jun 2025cs.SEcited by 25

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Large language models (LLMs) are reshaping automated program repair. We present a reproducible hierarchical taxonomy that organizes 66 LLM-based repair systems according to where repair capability and control logic principally reside: task-adapted parameters, prompt and context design, designer-specified workflows, or LLM-directed runtime control. Adaptation, generation pattern, runtime control, and auxiliary evidence are preserved as separate coded dimensions. This representation exposes control distinctions hidden by utilization labels and supports cross-paradigm analysis of system design and evaluation evidence. To the best of our knowledge, it is the first publicly available LLM-based software repair survey to operationalize Fine-Tuning, Prompting, Procedural, and Agentic as one corpus-wide primary classification. Our hierarchy complements prior surveys through one corpus-wide primary decision rule, while the result-level protocol audit bounds which reported results are defensibly comparable. To analyze how repair systems use benchmarks, we record benchmark variants, metrics, base models, and fault-localization assumptions for each system's primary reported result, identifying protocol-aligned comparison windows and benchmark-family fragments. We clarify paradigm trade-offs in task alignment, deployment cost, controllability, and multi-hunk or cross-file repair. We outline open challenges and research directions. Our artifacts and scripted survey pipeline are publicly available at https://github.com/GLEAM-Lab/ProgramRepair.

Key facts. Cited by 25 papers in the map (data through 13 Oct 2026). First posted on arXiv 30 Jun 2025.

Builds on

No reference list yet.

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 13 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2025: 6; 2026: 19.

25 papers.

Sort:

By area:

  1. 2025SWE-Effi: Re-Evaluating Software AI Agent System Effectiveness Under Resource Constraintscited by 17
  2. 2025Agentic Software Issue Resolution with Large Language Models: A Surveycited by 6
  3. 2025Automated Cloud Infrastructure-as-Code Reconciliation with AI Agentscited by 5
  4. 2026SWE-Adept: An LLM-Based Agentic Framework for Deep Codebase Analysis and Structured Issue Resolutioncited by 4
  5. 2026EviACT: An Evidence-to-Action Framework for Agentic Program Repaircited by 3
  6. 2026How Robustly do LLMs Understand Execution Semantics?cited by 2
  7. 2025Collaborative Agents for Automated Program Repair in Rubycited by 1
  8. 2025BackportBench: A Multilingual Benchmark for Automated Backporting of Patchescited by 1
  9. 2026A Dual-Loop Agent Framework for Automated Vulnerability Reproductioncited by 1
  10. 2026Why LLMs Fail: A Failure Analysis and Partial Success Measurement for Automated Security Patch Generationcited by 1
  11. 2026A Study on the Impact of Fault localization Granularity for Repository-Scale Code Repair Taskscited by 1
  12. 2026A-ProS: Towards Reliable Autonomous Programming Through Multi-Model Feedbackcited by 1
13 more
  1. 2025Autonomous Issue Resolver: Towards Zero-Touch Code Maintenancecited by 0
  2. 2026Verify Before You Fix: Agentic Execution Grounding for Trustworthy Cross-Language Code Analysiscited by 0
  3. 2026Fairness in Multi-Agent Systems for Software Engineering: An SDLC-Oriented Rapid Reviewcited by 0
  4. 2026A Metamorphic Testing Approach to Diagnosing Memorization in LLM-Based Program Repaircited by 0
  5. 2026BLAgent: Agentic RAG for File-Level Bug Localizationcited by 0
  6. 2026Efficient Skill Grounding via Code Refactoring with Small Language Modelscited by 0
  7. 2026Benchmarking Large Language Models on Floating-Point Error Classificationcited by 0
  8. 2026MultiFixer: A Coordinator-Proposer Based Multi-Agent Framework For Fixing Multi-Hunk Bugscited by 0
  9. 2026Agentic Method for Deterministic Validation of Legacy Code Migrationcited by 0
  10. 2026Benchmarking Automated Security Patch Backporting: How Far Are We?cited by 0
  11. 2026Test-Driven Approaches to Software Engineering with Large Language Models: A Survey of Phases, Tasks, and Agent Skillscited by 0
  12. 2026Escaping Python Dependency Hell: A Hybrid Replay-and-Repair Pipeline for Python Dependency Resolutioncited by 0
  13. 2026Do Tool Calls Execute as Intended? Measuring and Repairing Intent-Execution Correspondence in LLM Agentscited by 0

Similar, not cited

Close in wording, no citation either way

  1. 2026Refine After Generation: Toward Correct and Concise Patches in LLM-based Program Repair
  2. 2025Unlocking LLM Repair Capabilities Through Cross-Language Translation and Multi-Agent Refinement
  3. 2024RepairAgent: An Autonomous, LLM-Based Agent for Program Repair
  4. 2026Rethinking Automated Program Repair: The Impact of Bug Complexity, Fault Localization, and LLM Cost-efficiency
  5. 2024RePair: Automated Program Repair with Process-based Feedback
  6. 2024An Empirical Evaluation of Pre-trained Large Language Models for Repairing Declarative Formal Specifications
  7. 2025Automated Repair of C Programs Using Large Language Models
  8. 2026If It's Not Buggy, Don't Fix It: On the Dynamics of Iterative Bug-fixing with LLMs