# Externalizing Requirement-to-Repair Artifacts as Observable Traces for LLM-Based Program Repair

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2609.14913 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2609.14913/

## Key facts

- No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Builds on 8 of its 21 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 14 Sep 2026.

## Builds on (most cited first, 8 of 8)

- [SWE-bench: Can Language Models Resolve Real-World GitHub Issues?](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2310.06770/) (2023)
- [GraphCodeBERT: Pre-training Code Representations with Data Flow](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2009.08366/) (2020)
- [Agentless: Demystifying LLM-based Software Engineering Agents](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2407.01489/) (2024)
- [code2vec: Learning Distributed Representations of Code](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1803.09473/) (2018)
- [code2seq: Generating Sequences from Structured Representations of Code](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1808.01400/) (2018)
- [Keep the Conversation Going: Fixing 162 out of 337 bugs for 0.42 each using ChatGPT](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2304.00385/) (2023)
- [An Analysis of the Automatic Bug Fixing Performance of ChatGPT](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2301.08653/) (2023)
- [Nopol: Automatic Repair of Conditional Statement Bugs in Java Programs](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1811.04211/) (2018)

## Abstract (arXiv)

Repository-level repair requires not only correct patches but also inspectable records that explain how issue requirements are translated into code changes and post-edit evidence. We contribute THEMIS, a stage-aware repair workflow that externalizes this requirement-to-repair process through semantic interpretation, a runtime requirement-code graph, graph-derived Developer guidance, retained repair rationale and patches, and post-edit audit records. A retrospective audit of 300 SWE-bench Lite cases demonstrates that these artifacts provide broad support for cross-stage inspection: a complete Developer rationale is available for 288 cases, and 214 cases (71.3%) retain a complete audited field set connecting the selected stages. The retained records further enable systematic measurement of cross-stage correspondence: target symbols recur in 62.6% of Developer rationales and in 62.8% of patches, rising to 75.8% when related symbols are included. In a paired 100-case comparison, the relational workflow resolves 19 cases versus 9 for the direct same-input condition; because the two conditions also differ in Analyzer output, graph-derived distillation, and Judge records, we report this as preliminary, workflow-level evidence rather than a causal effect of the graph component. Together, these results show that THEMIS makes otherwise implicit requirement-to-repair transitions inspectable, enabling systematic examination of how repair decisions persist, align, and evolve across stages.