Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 cited by

SWT-Bench: Testing and Validating Real-World Bug-Fixes with Code Agents

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 2406.12952 v3 pith:ESHC47X7 submitted 2024-06-18 cs.SE cs.AIcs.LG

classification cs.SEcs.AIcs.LG
keywords codegenerationtestagentsdesignedbug-fixescasesfind
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal
0 comments
read the original abstract

Rigorous software testing is crucial for developing and maintaining high-quality code, making automated test generation a promising avenue for both improving software quality and boosting the effectiveness of code generation methods. However, while code generation with Large Language Models (LLMs) is an extraordinarily active research area, test generation remains relatively unexplored. We address this gap and investigate the capability of LLM-based Code Agents to formalize user issues into test cases. To this end, we propose a novel benchmark based on popular GitHub repositories, containing real-world issues, ground-truth bug-fixes, and golden tests. We find that LLMs generally perform surprisingly well at generating relevant test cases, with Code Agents designed for code repair exceeding the performance of systems designed specifically for test generation. Further, as test generation is a similar but more structured task than code generation, it allows for a more fine-grained analysis using issue reproduction rate and coverage changes, providing a dual metric for analyzing systems designed for code repair. Finally, we find that generated tests are an effective filter for proposed code fixes, doubling the precision of SWE-Agent. We release all data and code at https://github.com/logic-star-ai/SWT-Bench

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 4 Pith papers

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

  1. 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.

  2. FVRuleLearner: Operator-Level Reasoning Tree (Op-Tree)-Based Rules Learning for Formal Verification

    cs.AR 2026-03 unverdicted novelty 7.0 of 10

    FVRuleLearner retrieves learned operator-level reasoning rules to boost the functional correctness of LLM-generated SystemVerilog assertions by roughly 30 percentage points over simple prompting baselines.

  3. ExplainBench: Evaluating Code Explanations from Agents

    cs.SE 2026-07 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    Agent explanation quality can be scored automatically with LLM questionnaires, and this score ranks agents differently from SWE-bench Verified.

  4. CLOVER: A Test Case Generation Benchmark with Coverage, Long-Context, and Verification

    cs.SE 2025-02 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    CLOVER is a new Python unit-test-generation benchmark with 845 problems, contexts up to 128k tokens, and coverage-based retrieval, where all 14 evaluated models score below 35% on the hardest task.

Pith tools