mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

AI-Assisted Fixes to Code Review Comments at Scale

arXiv 2507.13499 ↗First posted 17 Jul 2025cs.SE cs.AI cs.PLcited by 0

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Aim. There are 10s of thousands of code review comments each week at Meta. We developed Metamate for Code Review (MetaMateCR) that provides AI-assisted fixes for reviewer comments in production at scale. Method. We developed an internal benchmark of 64k <review comment, patch> data points to fine-tune Llama models. Once our models achieve reasonable offline results, we roll them into production. To ensure that our AI-assisted fixes do not negatively impact the time it takes to do code reviews, we conduct randomized controlled safety trials as well as full production experiments. Offline Results. As a baseline, we compare GPT-4o to our small and large Llama models. In offline results, our LargeLSFT model creates an exact match patch 68% of the time outperforming GPT-4o by 9 percentage points (pp). The internal models also use more modern Hack functions when compared to the PHP functions suggested by GPT-4o. Safety Trial. When we roll MetaMateCR into production in a safety trial that compares no AI patches with AI patch suggestions, we see a large regression with reviewers taking over 5% longer to conduct reviews. After investigation, we modify the UX to only show authors the AI patches, and see no regressions in the time for reviews. Production. When we roll LargeLSFT into production, we see an ActionableToApplied rate of 19.7%, which is a 9.2pp improvement over GPT-4o. Our results illustrate the importance of safety trials in ensuring that AI does not inadvertently slow down engineers, and a successful review comment to AI patch product running at scale.

Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 23 of its 48 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 17 Jul 2025.

Builds on

23 of 48 references.

References · 23

  1. 2020Language Models are Few-Shot Learnerscited by 32,419
  2. 2024The Llama 3 Herd of Modelscited by 14,715
  3. 2021Evaluating Large Language Models Trained on Codecited by 8,320
  4. 2024GPT-4o System Cardcited by 4,588
  5. 2021Program Synthesis with Large Language Modelscited by 3,637
  6. 2023SWE-bench: Can Language Models Resolve Real-World GitHub Issues?cited by 3,373
  7. 2024LiveCodeBench: Holistic and Contamination Free Evaluation of Large Language Models for Codecited by 2,004
  8. 2022A Survey on In-context Learningcited by 721
  9. 2023The Impact of AI on Developer Productivity: Evidence from GitHub Copilotcited by 274
  10. 2023Continual Pre-training of Language Modelscited by 198
  11. 2023OctoPack: Instruction Tuning Code Large Language Modelscited by 189
  12. 2022A Comprehensive Survey of Few-shot Learning: Evolution, Applications, Challenges, and Opportunitiescited by 163
11 more
  1. 2022Automating Code Review Activities by Large-Scale Pre-trainingcited by 98
  2. 2025SWE-PolyBench: A multi-language benchmark for repository level evaluation of coding agentscited by 85
  3. 2024The Ultimate Guide to Fine-Tuning LLMs from Basics to Breakthroughs: An Exhaustive Review of Technologies, Research, Best Practices, Applied Research Challenges and Opportunitiescited by 64
  4. 2023AI-assisted Code Authoring at Scale: Fine-tuning, deploying, and mixed methods evaluationcited by 21
  5. 2024How much does AI impact development speed? An enterprise-based randomized controlled trialcited by 20
  6. 2024Multi-line AI-assisted Code Authoringcited by 13
  7. 2024RepairBench: Leaderboard of Frontier Models for Program Repaircited by 9
  8. 2020Nudge: Accelerating Overdue Pull Requests Towards Completioncited by 6
  9. 2024Moving Faster and Reducing Risk: Using LLMs in Release Deploymentcited by 6
  10. 2024AI-Assisted SQL Authoring at Industry Scalecited by 4
  11. 2023Factoring Expertise, Workload, and Turnover into Code Review Recommendationcited by 3

Built on by

Not cited yet.