# SWE-Replay: Efficient Test-Time Scaling for Software Engineering Agents

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2601.22129 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2601.22129/

## Key facts

- Cited by 12 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Placed in Reasoning for agents, planning and code, one of 17 directions in LLM reasoning.
- Builds on 23 of its 28 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 29 Jan 2026.

## Placed in

- LLM reasoning / [Reasoning for agents, planning and code](https://mlsanity.com/lr/reasoning-for-agents-planning-and-code/)
- LLM agents and tool use / [Software engineering coding agents](https://mlsanity.com/agents/software-engineering-coding-agents/)

## Builds on (most cited first, 23 of 23)

- [Evaluating Large Language Models Trained on Code](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2107.03374/) (2021)
- [Gemini 2.5: Pushing the Frontier with Advanced Reasoning, Multimodality, Long Context, and Next Generation Agentic Capabilities](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2507.06261/) (2025)
- [Program Synthesis with Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2108.07732/) (2021)
- [SWE-bench: Can Language Models Resolve Real-World GitHub Issues?](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2310.06770/) (2023)
- [Competition-Level Code Generation with AlphaCode](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2203.07814/) (2022)
- [OpenHands: An Open Platform for AI Software Developers as Generalist Agents](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2407.16741/) (2024)
- [Large Language Monkeys: Scaling Inference Compute with Repeated Sampling](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2407.21787/) (2024)
- [Teaching Large Language Models to Self-Debug](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2304.05128/) (2023)
- [Agentless: Demystifying LLM-based Software Engineering Agents](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2407.01489/) (2024)
- [Darwin Godel Machine: Open-Ended Evolution of Self-Improving Agents](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2505.22954/) (2025)
- [SWE-Bench Pro: Can AI Agents Solve Long-Horizon Software Engineering Tasks?](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2509.16941/) (2025)
- [A Survey on Test-Time Scaling in Large Language Models: What, How, Where, and How Well?](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2503.24235/) (2025)
- [Large Language Model-Based Agents for Software Engineering: A Survey](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2409.02977/) (2024)
- [SWE-Search: Enhancing Software Agents with Monte Carlo Tree Search and Iterative Refinement](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2410.20285/) (2024)
- [Live-SWE-agent: Can Software Engineering Agents Self-Evolve on the Fly?](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2511.13646/) (2025)
- [Trae Agent: An LLM-based Agent for Software Engineering with Test-time Scaling](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2507.23370/) (2025)
- [CWM: An Open-Weights LLM for Research on Code Generation with World Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2510.02387/) (2025)
- [CodeMonkeys: Scaling Test-Time Compute for Software Engineering](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2501.14723/) (2025)
- [The Cost of Dynamic Reasoning: Demystifying AI Agents and Test-Time Scaling from an AI Infrastructure Perspective](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2506.04301/) (2025)
- [LLM-as-a-Judge & Reward Model: What They Can and Cannot Do](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2409.11239/) (2024)
- [Thinking Longer, Not Larger: Enhancing Software Engineering Agents via Scaling Test-Time Compute](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2503.23803/) (2025)
- [Satori-SWE: Evolutionary Test-Time Scaling for Sample-Efficient Software Engineering](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2505.23604/) (2025)
- [Empowering Multi-Turn Tool-Integrated Agentic Reasoning with Group Turn Policy Optimization](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2511.14846/) (2025)

## Built on by (most cited first, 12 of 12)

- [Scaling Test-Time Compute for Agentic Coding](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2604.16529/) (2026)
- [From Question Answering to Task Completion: A Survey on Agent System and Harness Design](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2606.20683/) (2026)
- [How Inference Compute Shapes Frontier LLM Evaluation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2606.17930/) (2026)
- [FastContext: Training Efficient Repository Explorer for Coding Agents](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2606.14066/) (2026)
- [SWE-Doctor: Guiding Software Engineering Agents with Runtime Diagnosis from Multi-Faceted Bug Reproduction Tests](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2607.00990/) (2026)
- [Fail-Fast, Restart-Smart: Early Failure Prediction and Restart for SWE Agentic Tasks](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2608.03222/) (2026)
- [EvoRepair: Enhancing Vulnerability Repair Agents Through Experience-Based Self-Evolution](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2605.30105/) (2026)
- [DocSync: Agentic Documentation Maintenance via Critic-Guided Reflexion](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2605.02163/) (2026)
- [Disagree to Explore, Agree to Commit: Routing-Guided Test-Time Scaling for Software Agents](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2608.22191/) (2026)
- [FLARE: A Full-Lifecycle Dense Supervision Paradigm for Long-Horizon Coding Agents via Generative Reward Model](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2609.23808/) (2026)
- [CliffCompaction: Cost-Efficient Compaction for Long-Horizon Coding Agents](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2609.26779/) (2026)
- [Verification Trap: Understanding Test-Time Selection Failures under False Premises in Code Generation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2610.05170/) (2026)

## Abstract (arXiv)

Test-time scaling has been widely adopted to enhance the capabilities of Large Language Model (LLM) agents in software engineering (SWE) tasks. However, the standard approach of repeatedly sampling trajectories from scratch is computationally expensive. While recent methods have attempted to mitigate costs using specialized value agents, they can suffer from model miscalibration and fail to generalize to modern agents that synthesize custom bash scripts as tools. In this paper, we introduce SWE-Replay, the first efficient and generalizable test-time scaling technique for modern agents without reliance on potentially noisy value estimates. SWE-Replay optimizes the scaling process by recycling trajectories from prior trials, dynamically choosing to either explore from scratch or exploit archived experience by branching at critical intermediate steps. This selection of intermediate steps is driven by the potential and reasoning significance of repository exploration, rather than external LLM-based quality estimates. Our evaluation shows that, on SWE-Bench Verified, SWE-Replay consistently outperforms naive scaling, reducing costs by up to 17.4% while maintaining or even improving performance by up to 3.8%. Further evaluation on SWE-Bench Pro and Multilingual validates the generalizability of SWE-Replay, establishing it as a robust foundation for efficient test-time scaling of software engineering agents.