Agentic Program Repair from Test Failures at Scale: A Neuro-symbolic approach with static analysis and test execution feedback
On the map: LLM agents and tool use → Software engineering coding agents
Abstract (arXiv)
Aim: With the advent of LLMs, sophisticated agentic program repair has become viable at large organizations with large codebases. In this work, we develop an Engineering Agent that fixes the source code based on test failures at scale across diverse software offerings internally. Method: Using Llama as the base, we employ the ReAct harness to develop an agent. We start with a test failure that was triaged by a rule-based test failure bot. We then set up an agentic harness and allow the agent to reason and run a set of 15 actions from reading a file to generating a patch. We provide feedback to the agent through static analysis and test failures so it can refine its solution. We leverage an LLM-as-a-Judge to ensure that the patch conforms to the standards followed by a human review to land fixes. Benchmark Findings: We curated offline benchmarks for our patch generator, the Engineering Agent loop, and the LLM-as-a-Judge. In offline evaluations we found that a specialized 70B model is highly competitive with the much larger but vanilla Llama-405B. In an ablation study, we found that the ReAct harness (neural model) benefited from the symbolic information from static analysis tools and test execution traces. A model that strikes a balance between the solve rate and error rate vs the cost and latency has a benchmark solve rate of 42.3% using an average 11.8 feedback iterations. Production Findings: In a three month period, 80% of the generated fixes were reviewed, of which 31.5% were landed (25.5% of the total number of generated fixes). Feedback from Engineers: We used open coding to extract qualitative themes from engineers' feedback. We saw positive feedback in the form of quick approvals, gratitude, and surprise. We also found mixed feedback when the Engineering Agent's solution was partially correct and it served as a good starting point.
Key facts. Cited by 6 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 28 of its 49 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 24 Jul 2025.
Builds on
28 of 49 references.
Closest ancestors · 9
Same direction, newest first
- 2025SWE-smith: Scaling Data for Software Engineering Agents30 Apr
- 2025Agentic Bug Reproduction for Effective Automated Program Repair at Google3 Feb
- 2025Evaluating Agent-based Program Repair at Google13 Jan
- 2024MarsCode Agent: AI-native Automated Bug Fixing2 Sep
- 2024SpecRover: Code Intent Extraction via LLMs5 Aug
- 2024OpenHands: An Open Platform for AI Software Developers as Generalist Agents23 Jul
- 2024Agentless: Demystifying LLM-based Software Engineering Agents1 Jul
- 2024SWE-agent: Agent-Computer Interfaces Enable Automated Software Engineering6 May
- 2024RepairAgent: An Autonomous, LLM-Based Agent for Program Repair25 Mar
Other references · 19
- 2022ReAct: Synergizing Reasoning and Acting in Language Modelscited by 8,695
- 2023SWE-bench: Can Language Models Resolve Real-World GitHub Issues?cited by 3,373
- 2024Large Language Monkeys: Scaling Inference Compute with Repeated Samplingcited by 991
- 2024AutoCodeRover: Autonomous Program Improvementcited by 278
- 2025From LLM Reasoning to Autonomous AI Agents: A Comprehensive Reviewcited by 149
- 2022Practical Program Repair in the Era of Large Pre-trained Language Modelscited by 133
- 2023Keep the Conversation Going: Fixing 162 out of 337 bugs for 0.42 each using ChatGPTcited by 125
- 2025SWE-Lancer: Can Frontier LLMs Earn 1 Million from Real-World Freelance Software Engineering?cited by 105
- 2024CodeR: Issue Resolving with Multi-Agent and Task Graphscited by 91
- 2022Less Training, More Repairing Please: Revisiting Automated Program Repair via Zero-shot Learningcited by 76
- 2025The SWE-Bench Illusion: When State-of-the-Art LLMs Remember Instead of Reasoncited by 49
- 2024A Systematic Literature Review on Large Language Models for Automated Program Repaircited by 37
7 more
- 2018FixMiner: Mining Relevant Fix Patterns for Automated Program Repaircited by 22
- 2021Trust Enhancement Issues in Program Repaircited by 22
- 2023AI-assisted Code Authoring at Scale: Fine-tuning, deploying, and mixed methods evaluationcited by 21
- 2023A Survey on Automated Program Repair Techniquescited by 13
- 2024Multi-line AI-assisted Code Authoringcited by 13
- 2022Neurosymbolic Repair for Low-Code Formula Languagescited by 12
- 2024AI-Assisted SQL Authoring at Industry Scalecited by 4
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2025: 1; 2026: 5.
6 papers.
- 2026Dynamic Cogeneration of Bug Reproduction Test in Agentic Program Repaircited by 6
- 2025Abstain and Validate: A Dual-LLM Policy for Reducing Noise in Agentic Program Repaircited by 5
- 2026What Makes a Good Bug Report for an AI Agent?cited by 1
- 2026LLM-Based Automated Diagnosis Of Integration Test Failures At Googlecited by 0
- 2026AuditRepairBench: A Paired-Execution Trace Corpus for Evaluator-Channel Ranking Instability in Agent Repaircited by 0
- 2026Reasoning from Traces: Divergence-Guided Agentic Repair of WebAssembly Discrepanciescited by 0
- 2026Reasoning from Traces: Divergence-Guided Agentic Repair of WebAssembly Discrepancies6 Aug 2026
- 2026What Makes a Good Bug Report for an AI Agent?8 Jul 2026
- 2026AuditRepairBench: A Paired-Execution Trace Corpus for Evaluator-Channel Ranking Instability in Agent Repair6 May 2026
- 2026LLM-Based Automated Diagnosis Of Integration Test Failures At Google13 Apr 2026
- 2026Dynamic Cogeneration of Bug Reproduction Test in Agentic Program Repair27 Jan 2026
- 2025Abstain and Validate: A Dual-LLM Policy for Reducing Noise in Agentic Program Repair3 Oct 2025
Similar, not cited
Close in wording, no citation either way
- 2024An Empirical Study on LLM-based Agents for Automated Bug Fixing
- 2026SelfHeal: Empirical Fix Pattern Analysis and Bug Repair in LLM Agents
- 2025Understanding Automated Program Repair Agents Through the Lens of Traceability: An Empirical Study
- 2026When Passing Tests Hides Vulnerabilities: An Empirical Study of Silent Failures in Agentic Systems
- 2026To Run or Not to Run: Analyzing the Cost-Effectiveness of Code Execution in LLM-Based Program Repair
- 2026AgentFixer: From Failure Detection to Fix Recommendations in LLM Agentic Systems
- 2026Catching Developers in the Flow: Low-Latency Agentic Program Repair at Google Scale
- 2026Probe-and-Refine Tuning of Repository Guidance for Coding Agents