mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

Software World Models: From Consequence Prediction to Decision Value

arXiv 2610.04940 ↗First posted 4 Oct 2026cs.LG cs.AI cs.SEcited by 0

On the map: LLM agents and tool use → Software engineering coding agents

Abstract (arXiv)

A coding agent may safely modify one repository while silently breaking downstream services, libraries, or datastores that depend on it. Exhaustively running integration tests after every agent action is impractical, so the agent must predict these failures before executing them. Existing software world models predict the agent's own observations, while static change-impact analysis only identifies where a change may propagate. We instead introduce the Software World Model (SWM), which models the broader system affected by a code change and predicts its blast set: the components that the change will break. SWM follows three stages: explore, learn, and act. Explore executes candidate changes from restored system states, prioritizing regions where observed failures contradict the dependency graph. Learn fine-tunes a language model on these execution outcomes to predict downstream breakage. Act converts sampled predictions into per-consumer break probabilities for change ranking, proactive migration, and deciding when another execution is worth its cost. On held-out synthetic systems, SWM improves blast-set F1 from 0.431 for static reachability to 0.571±0.037, more than halves ranking regret, and improves migration return at all nine evaluation checkpoints. The two methods are complementary: reachability is stronger on dependencies represented in the graph, while SWM recovers failures caused by couplings the graph misses. Experiments on held-out real libraries further show that predicting structured failure outcomes, rather than only scalar risk, is important for downstream decision quality.

Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 7 Oct 2026). Placed in Software engineering coding agents, one of 16 directions in LLM agents and tool use. First posted on arXiv 4 Oct 2026.

Builds on

No reference list yet.

Built on by

Not cited yet.

Similar, not cited

Close in wording, no citation either way

  1. 2026Towards Evaluation of Implicit Software World Models in Coding LLMs
  2. 2026Failure as a Process: An Anatomy of CLI Coding Agent Trajectories
  3. 2025From Illusion to Insight: Change-Aware File-Level Software Defect Prediction Using Agentic AI
  4. 2026ChainSWE: Benchmarking Coding Agents on Multi-Bug Software Maintenance
  5. 2026Computer-Using World Model
  6. 2026XAI for Coding Agent Failures: Transforming Raw Execution Traces into Actionable Insights
  7. 2026Beyond Isolated Tasks: A Framework for Evaluating Coding Agents on Sequential Software Evolution
  8. 2026Debugging code world models