# PaT: Planning-after-Trial for Efficient Test-Time Code Generation

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2605.07248 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2605.07248/

## Key facts

- Cited by 2 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 19 of its 37 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 8 May 2026.

## Placed in

- LLM reasoning / [Reasoning for agents, planning and code](https://mlsanity.com/lr/reasoning-for-agents-planning-and-code/)

## Builds on (most cited first, 19 of 19)

- [Language Models are Few-Shot Learners](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2005.14165/) (2020)
- [Training language models to follow instructions with human feedback](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2203.02155/) (2022)
- [Scaling Laws for Neural Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2001.08361/) (2020)
- [Program Synthesis with Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2108.07732/) (2021)
- [Competition-Level Code Generation with AlphaCode](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2203.07814/) (2022)
- [Is Your Code Generated by ChatGPT Really Correct? Rigorous Evaluation of Large Language Models for Code Generation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2305.01210/) (2023)
- [Program of Thoughts Prompting: Disentangling Computation from Reasoning for Numerical Reasoning Tasks](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2211.12588/) (2022)
- [WizardCoder: Empowering Code Large Language Models with Evol-Instruct](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2306.08568/) (2023)
- [Self-Play Fine-Tuning Converts Weak Language Models to Strong Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2401.01335/) (2024)
- [CodeT: Code Generation with Generated Tests](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2207.10397/) (2022)
- [RepoCoder: Repository-Level Code Completion Through Iterative Retrieval and Generation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2303.12570/) (2023)
- [Debug like a Human: A Large Language Model Debugger via Verifying Runtime Execution Step-by-step](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2402.16906/) (2024)
- [CodeChain: Towards Modular Code Generation Through Chain of Self-revisions with Representative Sub-modules](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2310.08992/) (2023)
- [rStar-Coder: Scaling Competitive Code Reasoning with a Large-Scale Verified Dataset](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2505.21297/) (2025)
- [A Pair Programming Framework for Code Generation via Multi-Plan Exploration and Feedback-Driven Refinement](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2409.05001/) (2024)
- [Learning When to Plan: Efficiently Allocating Test-Time Compute for LLM Agents](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2509.03581/) (2025)
- [Divide-and-Conquer Meets Consensus: Unleashing the Power of Functions in Code Generation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2405.20092/) (2024)
- [INTERVENOR: Prompting the Coding Ability of Large Language Models with the Interactive Chain of Repair](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2311.09868/) (2023)
- [Learning to Generate Unit Tests for Automated Debugging](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2502.01619/) (2025)

## Built on by (most cited first, 2 of 2)

- [GraphAHA: Graph-Based Adaptive Search with Heterogeneous Actions for Test-Time Code Generation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2609.12757/) (2026)
- [Pay for the Fault, Not the Flow: Label-Free In-Flow Multi-Agent Workflow Optimization](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2610.01017/) (2026)

## Abstract (arXiv)

Beyond training-time optimization, scaling test-time computation has emerged as a key paradigm to extend the reasoning capabilities of Large Language Models (LLMs). However, most existing methods adopt a rigid Planning-before-Trial (PbT) policy, which inefficiently allocates test-time compute by incurring planning overhead even on directly solvable problems. We propose Planning-after-Trial (PaT), an adaptive policy for code generation that invokes a planner only upon verification failure. This adaptive policy naturally enables a heterogeneous model configuration: a cost-efficient model handles generation attempts, while a powerful model is reserved for targeted planning interventions. Empirically, across multiple benchmarks and model families, our approach significantly advances the cost-performance Pareto frontier. Notably, our heterogeneous configuration achieves performance comparable to a large homogeneous model while reducing inference cost by approximately 69%.