mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

DepRadar: Agentic Coordination for Context Aware Defect Impact Analysis in Deep Learning Libraries

arXiv 2601.09440 ↗First posted 14 Jan 2026cs.SEcited by 0

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

Abstract (arXiv)

Deep learning libraries like Transformers and Megatron are now widely adopted in modern AI programs. However, when these libraries introduce defects, ranging from silent computation errors to subtle performance regressions, it is often challenging for downstream users to assess whether their own programs are affected. Such impact analysis requires not only understanding the defect semantics but also checking whether the client code satisfies complex triggering conditions involving configuration flags, runtime environments, and indirect API usage. We present DepRadar, an agent coordination framework for fine grained defect and impact analysis in DL library updates. DepRadar coordinates four specialized agents across three steps: 1. the PR Miner and Code Diff Analyzer extract structured defect semantics from commits or pull requests, 2. the Orchestrator Agent synthesizes these signals into a unified defect pattern with trigger conditions, and 3. the Impact Analyzer checks downstream programs to determine whether the defect can be triggered. To improve accuracy and explainability, DepRadar integrates static analysis with DL-specific domain rules for defect reasoning and client side tracing. We evaluate DepRadar on 157 PRs and 70 commits across two representative DL libraries. It achieves 90% precision in defect identification and generates high quality structured fields (average field score 1.6). On 122 client programs, DepRadar identifies affected cases with 90% recall and 80% precision, substantially outperforming other baselines.

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 18 of its 52 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 14 Jan 2026.

Builds on

18 of 52 references.

References · 18

  1. 2022Toward Understanding Deep Learning Framework Bugscited by 26
  2. 2017Do Developers Update Their Library Dependencies? An Empirical Study on the Impact of Security Advisories on Library Migrationcited by 23
  3. 2017An Empirical Comparison of Dependency Network Evolution in Seven Software Packaging Ecosystemscited by 20
  4. 2021PyCG: Practical Call Graph Generation in Pythoncited by 17
  5. 2020A Fine-grained Data Set and Analysis of Tangling in Bug Fixing Commitscited by 11
  6. 2015Untangling Fine-Grained Code Changescited by 10
  7. 2023Bug Characterization in Machine Learning-based Systemscited by 10
  8. 2024Generative AI for Pull Request Descriptions: Adoption, Impact, and Developer Interventionscited by 10
  9. 2025Training with Confidence: Catching Silent Errors in Deep Learning Training with Automated Proactive Checkscited by 10
  10. 2022Demystifying the Vulnerability Propagation and Its Evolution via Dependency Trees in the NPM Ecosystemcited by 8
  11. 2023CHRONOS: Time-Aware Zero-Shot Identification of Libraries from Vulnerability Reportscited by 7
  12. 2023Mitigating Persistence of Open-Source Vulnerabilities in Maven Ecosystemcited by 4
6 more
  1. 2023Exploiting Library Vulnerability via Migration Based Automating Test Generationcited by 3
  2. 2025An Empirical Study of Vulnerable Package Dependencies in LLM Repositoriescited by 3
  3. 2023Compatible Remediation on Vulnerabilities from Third-Party Libraries for Java Projectscited by 2
  4. 2024Ecosystem-wide influences on pull request decisions: insights from NPMcited by 2
  5. 2024A Survey of Third-Party Library Security Research in Application Softwarecited by 1
  6. 2024Does the Vulnerability Threaten Our Projects? Automated Vulnerable API Detection for Third-Party Librariescited by 1

Built on by

Not cited yet.

Similar, not cited

Close in wording, no citation either way

  1. 2026Agentic Fuzzing: Opportunities and Challenges
  2. 2025From Illusion to Insight: Change-Aware File-Level Software Defect Prediction Using Agentic AI
  3. 2025LibVulnWatch: A Deep Assessment Agent System and Leaderboard for Uncovering Hidden Vulnerabilities in Open-Source AI Libraries
  4. 2026AgentDebugX: An Open-Source Toolkit for Failure Observability, Attribution, and Recovery in LLM Agents
  5. 2026ClayBuddy: A Framework, Evaluation, & Mitigation of Coding Agent Failures
  6. 2026AgentCollabBench: Diagnosing When Good Agents Make Bad Collaborators
  7. 2026AgentRx: Diagnosing AI Agent Failures from Execution Trajectories
  8. 2026A Jagged Frontier: Evaluating Robustness of Code Agents to Semantics-Preserving Transformations