Multi-Perspective Agentic Program Repair via Code Property Graphs and Temporal Execution Graphs
On the map: LLM agents and tool use → Software engineering coding agents
Abstract (arXiv)
Large language models (LLMs) have improved automated program repair (APR), but two limitations remain. First, raw execution traces are often too large and repetitive to serve as effective model context. Second, repeated patch sampling may produce different implementations without yielding distinct root-cause hypotheses or repair strategies. We present CT-Repair, an agentic APR framework representing static and dynamic evidence as queryable Code Property Graph (CPG) and Temporal Execution Graph (TEG). CT-Repair applies a three-stage filtering pipeline to construct compact TEGs. Three finite-state-machine-guided agents analyze each bug from static, dynamic, and hybrid perspectives and independently produce evidence-grounded repair strategies. A strategy-guided generation procedure instantiates these strategies as candidate patches and uses validation feedback to refine the most promising strategy. We evaluate CT-Repair on 854 Java bugs from Defects4J v3.0. In the mixed-model configuration, CT-Repair correctly repairs 489 bugs. Under a controlled GPT-5.4-mini configuration, it repairs 388 bugs, 19 and 30 more than ReinFix and RepairAgent, respectively. The union of the three evidence perspectives repairs 99 more bugs than the strongest individual perspective. The filtering pipeline also compacts runtime evidence, with execution filtering narrowing the candidate method scope by 94.85% on average and behavior filtering further reducing retained runtime records by 55.97%. These results show that structured runtime evidence and multi-perspective reasoning can improve repair effectiveness without relying solely on a larger patch-generation budget.
Key facts. Cited by 1 paper in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Placed in Software engineering coding agents, one of 16 directions in LLM agents and tool use. Builds on 30 of its 44 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 14 Jul 2026.
Builds on
30 of 44 references.
Closest ancestors · 6
Same direction, newest first
- 2025SWE-Debate: Competitive Multi-Agent Debate for Software Issue Resolution31 Jul
- 2024SpecRover: Code Intent Extraction via LLMs5 Aug
- 2024SWE-agent: Agent-Computer Interfaces Enable Automated Software Engineering6 May
- 2024UniDebugger: Hierarchical Multi-Agent Framework for Unified Software Debugging26 Apr
- 2024MAGIS: LLM-Based Multi-Agent Framework for GitHub Issue Resolution26 Mar
- 2024RepairAgent: An Autonomous, LLM-Based Agent for Program Repair25 Mar
Other references · 24
- 2023Lost in the Middle: How Language Models Use Long Contextscited by 3,455
- 2023Teaching Large Language Models to Self-Debugcited by 988
- 2024AutoCodeRover: Autonomous Program Improvementcited by 278
- 2018SequenceR: Sequence-to-Sequence Learning for End-to-End Program Repaircited by 145
- 2022Practical Program Repair in the Era of Large Pre-trained Language Modelscited by 133
- 2024Debug like a Human: A Large Language Model Debugger via Verifying Runtime Execution Step-by-stepcited by 127
- 2023Keep the Conversation Going: Fixing 162 out of 337 bugs for 0.42 each using ChatGPTcited by 125
- 2018An Empirical Study on Learning Bug-Fixing Patches in the Wild via Neural Machine Translationcited by 108
- 2021CURE: Code-Aware Neural Machine Translation for Automatic Program Repaircited by 86
- 2022Less Training, More Repairing Please: Revisiting Automated Program Repair via Zero-shot Learningcited by 76
- 2019TBar: Revisiting Template-based Automated Program Repaircited by 65
- 2021A Syntax-Guided Edit Decoder for Neural Program Repaircited by 57
12 more
- 2023A Survey of Learning-based Automated Program Repaircited by 55
- 2021Neural Program Repair with Execution-based Backpropagationcited by 50
- 2024A Systematic Literature Review on Large Language Models for Automated Program Repaircited by 37
- 2023GAMMA: Revisiting Template-based Automated Program Repair via Mask Predictioncited by 23
- 2024ThinkRepair: Self-Directed Automated Program Repaircited by 23
- 2022DEAR: A Novel Deep Learning-based Approach for Automated Program Repaircited by 22
- 2025Towards Effectively Leveraging Execution Traces for Program Repair with Code LLMscited by 11
- 2025Repair Ingredients Are All You Need: Improving Large Language Model-Based Program Repair via Repair Ingredients Searchcited by 8
- 2026From Guessing to Seeing: Enhancing LLM-Based Program Repair via Trace-Guided Multi-strategy Debatecited by 6
- 2023TraceFixer: Execution Trace-Driven Program Repaircited by 4
- 2025DynaFix: Iterative Automated Program Repair Driven by Execution-Level Dynamic Informationcited by 3
- 2026DebugRepair: Enhancing LLM-Based Automated Program Repair via Self-Directed Debuggingcited by 3
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2026: 1.
1 paper.
Similar, not cited
Close in wording, no citation either way
- 2025REFINE: Enhancing Program Repair Agents through Context-Aware Patch Refinement
- 2026EviACT: An Evidence-to-Action Framework for Agentic Program Repair
- 2025Understanding Automated Program Repair Agents Through the Lens of Traceability: An Empirical Study
- 2026Refine After Generation: Toward Correct and Concise Patches in LLM-based Program Repair
- 2025SWE-Synth: Synthesizing Verifiable Bug-Fix Data to Enable Large Language Models in Resolving Real-World Bugs
- 2026PhoenixRepair: Rethinking Repair Strategy Exploration in Software Agents
- 2026AgenticRepair: Multi-Faceted Program Context Engineering for Agentic Vulnerability Repair
- 2026If It's Not Buggy, Don't Fix It: On the Dynamics of Iterative Bug-fixing with LLMs