PSearch: Search-based Patch Generation in the Era of LLM-based Automated Program Repair
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Large Language Models (LLMs) have substantially advanced Automated Program Repair (APR), yet most existing LLM-based APR methods still rely on trial-and-error to generate patches. Such a strategy explores candidate patches in a weakly structured manner, making it difficult to assess the future potential of search directions and allocate search budget effectively. To address this limitation, we propose Psearch, a search-based patch generation framework for LLM-based APR centered on iterative patch evaluation and refinement. Instead of treating patch generation as repeated independent sampling, Psearch maintains a structured search state over intermediate patches, continuously evaluates the promise of explored search paths, and prioritizes the most promising ones for further refinement. This design enables Psearch to abandon weak directions early and progressively approach correct fixes through long-horizon search. Importantly, Psearch can be integrated with different search algorithms, while our current implementation adopts Monte Carlo Tree Search as one effective instantiation. We evaluate Psearch on five widely used bug and vulnerability benchmarks. Experimental results show that Psearch correctly repairs 201 out of 835 bugs in Defects4J, outperforming all 12 state-of-the-art baselines. Psearch also fixes 27 of 79 vulnerabilities in VUL4J and resolves 164 of 300 issues in SWE-Bench-Lite. Moreover, with a patch size of 16, Psearch reduces monetary cost to roughly 50% of strong baselines while maintaining superior repair effectiveness. These results highlight the effectiveness of Psearch for improving LLM-based APR. The code and results can be found at https://github.com/Tomsawyerhu/Psearch
Key facts. Cited by 5 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). First posted on arXiv 2 Jul 2025.
Builds on
No reference list yet.
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2025: 1; 2026: 4.
5 papers.
- 2025Self-Abstraction from Grounded Experience for Plan-Guided Policy Refinementcited by 9
- 2026From Historical Patches to Repair Plans: Outcome-Conditioned Reasoning for Repository-Level Program Repaircited by 3
- 2026RepoRescue: An Empirical Study of LLM Agents on Whole-Repository Compatibility Rescuecited by 1
- 2026How Do LLMs Read Bug Reports? An Empirical Study of Attention in LLMs for Automated Program Repaircited by 0
- 2026When LLM Meets Tree Search: A Systematic View of Inference as Search in Large Language Modelscited by 0
- 2026When LLM Meets Tree Search: A Systematic View of Inference as Search in Large Language Models31 Aug 2026
- 2026How Do LLMs Read Bug Reports? An Empirical Study of Attention in LLMs for Automated Program Repair28 Jul 2026
- 2026RepoRescue: An Empirical Study of LLM Agents on Whole-Repository Compatibility Rescue1 Jul 2026
- 2026From Historical Patches to Repair Plans: Outcome-Conditioned Reasoning for Repository-Level Program Repair30 Jan 2026
- 2025Self-Abstraction from Grounded Experience for Plan-Guided Policy Refinement8 Nov 2025