mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

Coaching Qwen3 Coder 30B to Think Like a CodeClash Arena Agent

arXiv 2609.16096 ↗First posted 14 Sep 2026cs.SE cs.AIcited by 0

On the map: LLM reasoning → Reasoning for agents, planning and code

also in 1 more
Abstract (arXiv)

Large language model coding agents have recently become useful for software tasks, but weaker or open-weight agents still struggle to reliably interpret user intent and execute complex multi-step workflows. This gap is especially visible in long-horizon settings, where an agent must repeatedly inspect prior outcomes, diagnose failure, and choose the next code edit under interaction constraints. It motivates a natural question: what can we do to improve the thinking process of a weak code agent? We study this question in CodeClash, a code-arena benchmark where the original work evaluates 8 commercial coding agents across 6 arenas through multi-round tournaments. Since Qwen3 Coder Plus ranks last among them, we take the open-weight Qwen3-Coder-30B as a case study and investigate how to improve it with distilled knowledge from stronger agents. Our analysis shows that Qwen3-Coder-30B is not well optimized for arena-style interaction: it frequently produces syntax and protocol-breaking errors and exhibits weak strategic adaptation across rounds. These failures are difficult to correct with vanilla instruction tuning alone, since offline SFT cannot directly verify whether a generated action is valid or beneficial. To address this, we propose ReAct SFT, which rewrites teacher trajectories into explicit [obs][thought][act] chains, and trajectoryquality weighted SFT, which reweights samples to encourage post-edit checking. ReAct SFT substantially improves strategic behavior, and our fine-tuned model outperforms the original Qwen3 Coder Plus in tournament evaluation.

Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026). Placed in Reasoning for agents, planning and code, one of 17 directions in LLM reasoning. Builds on 6 of its 8 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 14 Sep 2026.

Builds on

6 of 8 references.

References · 6

  1. 2021LoRA: Low-Rank Adaptation of Large Language Modelscited by 14,380
  2. 2022ReAct: Synergizing Reasoning and Acting in Language Modelscited by 8,695
  3. 2021Evaluating Large Language Models Trained on Codecited by 8,320
  4. 2022Scaling Instruction-Finetuned Language Modelscited by 3,024
  5. 2023How Far Can Camels Go? Exploring the State of Instruction Tuning on Open Resourcescited by 408
  6. 2023InterCode: Standardizing and Benchmarking Interactive Coding with Execution Feedbackcited by 238

Built on by

Not cited yet.

Similar, not cited

Close in wording, no citation either way

  1. 2026Qwen3-Coder-Next Technical Report
  2. 2026EvoCode-Bench: Evaluating Coding Agents in Multi-Turn Iterative Interactions
  3. 2026Beyond Resolution Rates: Behavioral Drivers of Coding Agent Success and Failure
  4. 2025MapCoder-Lite: Distilling Multi-Agent Coding into a Single Small LLM
  5. 2024MapCoder: Multi-Agent Code Generation for Competitive Problem Solving
  6. 2026MTAC-IFBench: Benchmarking Instruction-Following in Multi-Turn Agentic Coding
  7. 2026FormulaCode: Evaluating Agentic Optimization on Large Codebases
  8. 2026Scaling Agentic Verifier for Competitive Coding