ReproRepo: Scaling Reproducibility Audits with GitHub Repository Issues
On the map: LLM agents and tool use → Web, search, and research agents
Abstract (arXiv)
Reproducing research results from papers and released code is central to scientific progress. Existing works have introduced benchmarks to evaluate whether LLM agents can assist with reproducibility, but they are difficult to scale due to their reliance on substantial manual effort for data curation and evaluation. We introduce ReproRepo, a scalable framework for reproducibility evaluation that leverages human-raised GitHub issues as naturally occurring supervision on realistic reproduction blockers. We instantiate ReproRepo on 1,149 recent machine learning papers from major conferences and evaluate four frontier model-agent configurations. Our results show that LLM agents, even without executing code, can identify many real-world reproducibility problems from paper-repository pairs: the best agent in our study, namely Codex with GPT-5.5, surfaces at least one semantically related human-reported blocker for ~90% of papers in the study. Further analysis shows that agents are particularly effective for surfacing visible failures and identifying the right semantic region, but may still be insufficient in exact localization. ReproRepo can serve as a reusable, scalable framework for future evaluations of LLM agents on real-world reproducibility auditing. Our code is released at https://github.com/LithiumDA/ReproRepo.
Key facts. Cited by 2 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Placed in Web, search, and research agents, one of 16 directions in LLM agents and tool use. Builds on 32 of its 51 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 16 Jun 2026.
Builds on
32 of 51 references.
Closest ancestors · 10
Same direction, newest first
- 2026SoundnessBench: Can Your AI Scientist Really Tell Good Research Ideas from Bad Ones?28 May
- 2026Read the Paper, Write the Code: Agentic Reproduction of Social-Science Results23 Apr
- 2026ReplicatorBench: Benchmarking LLM Agents for Replicability in Social and Behavioral Sciences11 Feb
- 2026Automating Computational Reproducibility in Social Science: Comparing Prompt-Based and Agent-Based Approaches9 Feb
- 2026FIRE-Bench: Evaluating AI Agents on the Rediscovery of Scientific Insights2 Feb
- 2025REPRO-Bench: Can Agentic AI Systems Assess the Reproducibility of Social Science Research?25 Jul
- 2025CoMind: Towards Community-Driven Agents for Machine Learning Engineering25 Jun
- 2024MLE-bench: Evaluating Machine Learning Agents on Machine Learning Engineering9 Oct
- 2024ScienceAgentBench: Toward Rigorous Assessment of Language Agents for Data-Driven Scientific Discovery7 Oct
- 2024CORE-Bench: Fostering the Credibility of Published Research Through a Computational Reproducibility Agent Benchmark17 Sep
Other references · 22
- 2023SWE-bench: Can Language Models Resolve Real-World GitHub Issues?cited by 3,373
- 2026DeepSeek-V4: Towards Highly Efficient Million-Token Context Intelligencecited by 1,040
- 2026Terminal-Bench: Benchmarking Agents on Hard, Realistic Tasks in Command Line Interfacescited by 585
- 2020Improving Reproducibility in Machine Learning Research (A Report from the NeurIPS 2019 Reproducibility Program)cited by 322
- 2025PaperBench: Evaluating AI's Ability to Replicate AI Researchcited by 321
- 2024SciCode: A Research Coding Benchmark Curated by Scientistscited by 178
- 2023ReviewerGPT? An Exploratory Study on Using Large Language Models for Paper Reviewingcited by 122
- 2025Paper2Code: Automating Code Generation from Scientific Papers in Machine Learningcited by 70
- 2025CodePDE: An Inference Framework for LLM-driven PDE Solver Generationcited by 39
- 2025AutoReproduce: Automatic AI Experiment Reproduction with Paper Lineagecited by 32
- 2025CO-Bench: Benchmarking Language Model Agents in Algorithm Search for Combinatorial Optimizationcited by 29
- 2025LMR-BENCH: Evaluating LLM Agent's Ability on Reproducing Language Modeling Researchcited by 29
10 more
- 2025The More You Automate, the Less You See: Hidden Pitfalls of AI Scientist Systemscited by 29
- 2025When AI Co-Scientists Fail: SPOT-a Benchmark for Automated Verification of Scientific Researchcited by 26
- 2023Reproducibility in NLP: What Have We Learned from the Checklist?cited by 18
- 2024Usefulness of LLMs as an Author Checklist Assistant for Scientific Papers: NeurIPS'24 Experimentcited by 16
- 2025FLAWS: A Benchmark for Error Identification and Localization in Scientific Paperscited by 14
- 2025Reflective Paper-to-Code Reproduction Enabled by Fine-Grained Verificationcited by 10
- 2025Paper Copilot: Tracking the Evolution of Peer Review in AI Conferencescited by 10
- 2026The Story is Not the Science: Execution-Grounded Evaluation of Mechanistic Interpretability Researchcited by 6
- 2026Scaling Reproducibility: An AI-Assisted Workflow for Large-Scale Replication and Reanalysiscited by 4
- 2026PaperRepro: Automated Computational Reproducibility Assessment for Social Science Paperscited by 2
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2026: 2.
2 papers.
Similar, not cited
Close in wording, no citation either way
- 2026Automated Table Reproduction via Code Generation
- 2026Rollout Cards: A Reproducibility Standard for Agent Research
- 2025RepoAudit: An Autonomous LLM-Agent for Repository-Level Code Auditing
- 2026Beyond the Text: Verifying That Agent-Written Papers Are Backed by Their Artifacts
- 2026Beyond Execution: Auditing Experimental Fidelity in LLM-Driven Scientific Research
- 2026Overview of the NLPCC 2026 Shared Task 11: Agent-Based Experiment Reproduction from Scientific Papers
- 2026BenchGuard: Who Guards the Benchmarks? Automated Auditing of LLM Agent Benchmarks
- 2026RepoZero: Can LLMs Generate a Code Repository from Scratch?