Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 cited by

EnvBench: A Benchmark for Automated Environment Setup

Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.

SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event

T0 review · schema-true

One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.

pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp

arxiv 2503.14443 v1 pith:XFT5GVPG submitted 2025-03-18 cs.LG cs.SE

classification cs.LGcs.SE
keywords benchmarkenvbenchenvironmentsetuprepositoriespythonagenticapproaches
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal
0 comments
read the original abstract

Recent advances in Large Language Models (LLMs) have enabled researchers to focus on practical repository-level tasks in software engineering domain. In this work, we consider a cornerstone task for automating work with software repositories-environment setup, i.e., a task of configuring a repository-specific development environment on a system. Existing studies on environment setup introduce innovative agentic strategies, but their evaluation is often based on small datasets that may not capture the full range of configuration challenges encountered in practice. To address this gap, we introduce a comprehensive environment setup benchmark EnvBench. It encompasses 329 Python and 665 JVM-based (Java, Kotlin) repositories, with a focus on repositories that present genuine configuration challenges, excluding projects that can be fully configured by simple deterministic scripts. To enable further benchmark extension and usage for model tuning, we implement two automatic metrics: a static analysis check for missing imports in Python and a compilation check for JVM languages. We demonstrate the applicability of our benchmark by evaluating three environment setup approaches, including a simple zero-shot baseline and two agentic workflows, that we test with two powerful LLM backbones, GPT-4o and GPT-4o-mini. The best approach manages to successfully configure 6.69% repositories for Python and 29.47% repositories for JVM, suggesting that EnvBench remains challenging for current approaches. Our benchmark suite is publicly available at https://github.com/JetBrains-Research/EnvBench. The dataset and experiment trajectories are available at https://jb.gg/envbench.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 3 Pith papers

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. Failure as a Process: An Anatomy of CLI Coding Agent Trajectories

    cs.SE 2026-07 conditional novelty 7.0 of 10

    Across 1,794 CLI agent trajectories, failures are mostly epistemic, start by median step 7, and often stay silent until after lock-in.

  2. Evaluating LLM Agents on Automated Software Analysis Tasks

    cs.SE 2026-04 unverdicted novelty 7.0 of 10

    A purpose-built, staged LLM agent correctly sets up and executes software analysis tools on 33 of 35 benchmark tasks, outperforming general-purpose agent baselines by at least 17 percentage points.

  3. MADE: Belief-Driven Dual-Agent Coordination for Autonomous Model Deployment

    cs.SE 2026-08 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    A belief-driven two-agent system automatically serves 84 of 122 open-source model repositories as working APIs, and the authors release a benchmark for model-to-API deployment.

Pith tools