# JevCoder: When Does Decision Delegation Pay Off in Code Repair?

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2610.19596 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2610.19596/

## Key facts

- No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Placed in Software engineering coding agents, one of 16 directions in LLM agents and tool use.
- Builds on 9 of its 27 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 14 Oct 2026.

## Placed in

- LLM agents and tool use / [Software engineering coding agents](https://mlsanity.com/agents/software-engineering-coding-agents/)

## Builds on (most cited first, 9 of 9)

- [Judging LLM-as-a-Judge with MT-Bench and Chatbot Arena](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2306.05685/) (2023)
- [G-Eval: NLG Evaluation using GPT-4 with Better Human Alignment](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2303.16634/) (2023)
- [FrugalGPT: How to Use Large Language Models While Reducing Cost and Improving Performance](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2305.05176/) (2023)
- [Training Software Engineering Agents and Verifiers with SWE-Gym](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2412.21139/) (2024)
- [SWE-Bench Pro: Can AI Agents Solve Long-Horizon Software Engineering Tasks?](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2509.16941/) (2025)
- [CodeMonkeys: Scaling Test-Time Compute for Software Engineering](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2501.14723/) (2025)
- [When Agents go Astray: Course-Correcting SWE Agents with PRMs](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2509.02360/) (2025)
- [Steer, Don't Solve: Training Small Critic Models for Large Code Agents](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2606.21811/) (2026)
- [SWE-Bench Pro Verified: A Reliable Benchmark for Software Engineering Agents](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2609.08149/) (2026)

## Abstract (arXiv)

A coding agent repeatedly makes decisions as it repairs code. These decisions shape repair trajectories and affect the token cost of successive model requests. We ask which repair decisions can be delegated to a low-cost probabilistic judge to reduce token use while maintaining repair quality. The judges answer questions with probabilities over predefined answers, without generating explanations. We evaluate judgment quality across repair stages and test how individual interventions change subsequent repair work. We compare these interventions with unguided repair, which uses no judge, and with the same workflow using the repair model itself as the judge. The benefit depends on the work an intervention changes, rather than the cost of the judgment alone. Based on these studies, we propose JevCoder, a workflow built around Jev, a low-cost probabilistic judge. It combines code-snippet recommendations with action-type guidance and uses judgments to determine when to submit. We evaluate three repair models, each on the same 400 tasks: 200 from SWE-bench Verified and 200 from SWE-Bench Pro Verified. Compared to unguided repair, JevCoder reduces mean repair-model token use by 21.6%-50.6%, with higher observed repair rates across all three models.