mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

SLICEMATE: Accurate and Scalable Static Program Slicing via LLM-Powered Agents

arXiv 2507.18957 ↗First posted 25 Jul 2025cs.SEcited by 0

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

Abstract (arXiv)

Static program slicing, which extracts the executable portions of a program that affect the values at a specific location, supports many software analysis tasks such as debugging and security auditing. However, traditional slicing tools rely on computationally expensive reachability analysis over dependency graphs, which struggle to scale to large programs and often fail to handle code with incomplete syntax. Recently emerged learning-based methods, while more robust to such cases, still fall short of achieving comparable performance to traditional methods on well-formed code. In this work, we propose SliceMate, a novel static program slicing solution powered by Large Language Model (LLM) agents. It bypasses the need for explicit dependency graph construction and achieving superior slicing accuracy. Concretely, SliceMate integrates three specialized agents: (1) a synthesis agent that produces candidate slices by incrementally expanding the scan scope across functions and files guided by LLM-inferred dependencies; (2) a verification agent that performs conciseness and completeness checks of the candidate slices, detecting missing or irrelevant statements; and (3) a refinement agent that repairs the slices with minimal edits in accordance with the verification results. These agents are orchestrated by a control module that ensures timely convergence and outputs high-quality slices without manual intervention. For rigorous evaluation, we construct a new and high-quality benchmark, SliceBench, comprising 2,200 manually annotated Java and Python programs, with program lengths ranging from 5 to 8,577 lines, significantly larger than those in existing slicing benchmarks. Experimental results show that SliceMate greatly outperforms both traditional and learning-based slicing tools.

Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026). Placed in Software engineering coding agents, one of 16 directions in LLM agents and tool use. Builds on 21 of its 58 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 25 Jul 2025.

Builds on

21 of 58 references.

Closest ancestors · 5

Same direction, newest first

  1. 2024You Name It, I Run It: An LLM Agent to Execute Tests of Arbitrary Projects13 Dec
  2. 2024SWE-agent: Agent-Computer Interfaces Enable Automated Software Engineering6 May
  3. 2024LLM-Based Multi-Agent Systems for Software Engineering: Literature Review, Vision and the Road Ahead7 Apr
  4. 2024RepairAgent: An Autonomous, LLM-Based Agent for Program Repair25 Mar
  5. 2024CodeAgent: Enhancing Code Generation with Tool-Integrated Agent Systems for Real-World Repo-level Coding Challenges14 Jan

Other references · 16

  1. 2023A Survey on Large Language Model based Autonomous Agentscited by 2,242
  2. 2023The Rise and Potential of Large Language Model Based Agents: A Surveycited by 1,439
  3. 2020CodeBERT: A Pre-Trained Model for Programming and Natural Languagescited by 1,310
  4. 2023Large Language Modelscited by 780
  5. 2020GraphCodeBERT: Pre-training Code Representations with Data Flowcited by 609
  6. 2023Large Language Models for Software Engineering: A Systematic Literature Reviewcited by 399
  7. 2021CodeNet: A Large-Scale AI for Code Dataset for Learning a Diversity of Coding Taskscited by 200
  8. 2023Software Testing with Large Language Models: Survey, Landscape, and Visioncited by 166
  9. 2023Large Language Models for Test-Free Fault Localizationcited by 67
  10. 2015SourcererCC: Scaling Code Clone Detection to Big Codecited by 40
  11. 2024BugsInPy: A Database of Existing Bugs in Python Programs to Enable Controlled Testing and Debugging Studiescited by 36
  12. 2025Bridging Bug Localization and Issue Fixing: A Hierarchical Localization Framework Leveraging Large Language Modelscited by 11
4 more
  1. 2021Locating Faults with Program Slicing: An Empirical Analysiscited by 7
  2. 2021IncBL: Incremental Bug Localizationcited by 4
  3. 2024Utilizing Precise and Complete Code Context to Guide LLM in Automatic False Positive Mitigationcited by 4
  4. 2024The Impact of Program Reduction on Automated Program Repaircited by 1

Built on by

Not cited yet.

Similar, not cited

Close in wording, no citation either way

  1. 2024Program Slicing in the Era of Large Language Models ↗
  2. 2025StackPilot: Autonomous Function Agents for Scalable and Environment-Free Code Execution
  3. 2026Veritas: Grounding LLM Agents for Reliable Vulnerability Reasoning over Stripped Binaries
  4. 2025LocAgent: Graph-Guided LLM Agents for Code Localization
  5. 2025CodeARC: Benchmarking Reasoning Capabilities of LLM Agents for Inductive Program Synthesis
  6. 2025CoRe: Benchmarking LLMs Code Reasoning Capabilities through Static Analysis Tasks
  7. 2026From Laboratory to Real-World Applications: Benchmarking Agentic Code Reasoning at the Repository Level
  8. 2026ProgramGym: Scaling Training Environments for Long-Horizon Program Reproduction Agents