Searcharxiv⌕ Search
Home/Archive/arXiv

arXiv · 2610.13563

Not All Correct Fixes Run Alike: An Empirical Study of Patch Performance in Repository-Level Issue Resolution

Han Peng·Xing Hu·Feifei Niu·Huan Li·Xin Xia
View original source ↗Read source document ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

Repository-level issue-resolution benchmarks such as SWE-bench evaluate submitted patches primarily based on whether they pass the correctness tests, leaving the runtime performance of different test-passing patches largely unexplored. Evaluating patch performance is essential but challenging since designing performance workloads for each benchmark instance is costly. However, these benchmarks already provide a natural candidate: the built-in \emph{FAIL\_TO\_PASS} (F2P) tests, which exercise the behavior affected by the issue fix. We therefore investigate whether the provided F2P tests can be repurposed to evaluate patch performance. Overall, we choose four frontier models, Claude Opus~5, GPT~5.6, DeepSeek V4 Pro, and Qwen~3.8 Max, paired with SWE-agent to resolve the pre-filtered measurable corpus from verified splits of SWE-bench and SWE-bench-Live, yielding 262 cases with at least two different correct solutions, including the developer ground-truth patch. We then measure each solution's runtime performance in instruction count and wall-clock time on the native F2P test, and use Welch ANOVA instead of the RSD proposed in prior work as a more robust statistical discrimination criterion. We find that this methodology exhibits notable discrimination capability in runtime performance and identifies performance differences among patches in almost half of the instances. Our empirical study shows that the runtime performance of generated patches is independent of the issue resolution rate of LLMs, with nearly reversed model rankings. The case study also shows that the performance analysis reveals architectural regression in some patches that the correctness evaluation overlooked. These findings suggest that resolution rate does not adequately characterize LLMs' capability for repository-level issue resolution, motivating future evaluations to consider patch performance alongside it.

Explore related subjects

cs.SEcs.CL

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Han Peng, Xing Hu, Feifei Niu, Huan Li, Xin Xia. 2026-10-09. Not All Correct Fixes Run Alike: An Empirical Study of Patch Performance in Repository-Level Issue Resolution. https://arxiv.org/abs/2610.13563

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

arXiv2026

Bistable by Construction: Wall-Clock-Calibrated State Monitors Have No Moment-Detection Regime at Agent Cadence

Runtime monitors for autonomous agents commonly threshold an accumulated internal state - a behavioural baseline, a drift statistic, or, in our prior work, a modelled affective state. We previously reported a State Saturation Trap: threshold-on-state triggers over a continuous affect engine become near-constant alarms on SWE-bench debugging agents (Modgil 2026). A post-release audit found the engine received dt=0 between actions, so its exponential decay never operated: the published trap is a pure-accumulator result. We correct the record (erratum, v2) and treat the flaw as an experiment. The key variable it exposes is whether a monitor's dynamics are calibrated in sample time (per observation, as in CUSUM) or wall-clock time (half-lives in seconds, as in affect models and EMA baselines). On fixed-rate streams these coincide; on agent streams, where inter-action time varies by orders of magnitude, they do not. A pre-registered sweep over uniform intervals (dt in {0..600}s) on 20 trajectories shows the wall-clock level trigger has two regimes: at dt<=1s a constant alarm (20/20; median 18 firings); at dt>=60s silent. Every critical dt lies in (1,30]s. A scriptable gpt-5.4-mini agent loop measures latency at median 1.53s (p90 2.33s), inside the trap regime, vindicating the empirical finding under a corrected mechanism. The structure is a property of the calibration class, not the engine: a minimal wall-clock accumulator over the raw error stream reproduces the same cliff, while a sample-time CUSUM over the identical stream is exactly dt-invariant (20/20). A rising-edge trigger with hysteresis fires 0-3 times per trajectory in every condition. We conclude that wall-clock-calibrated leaky-integrator monitors admit no regime in which they act as moment detectors on agent streams; transition detection escapes the trap at every cadence, but does not recover human intervention timing.

cs.SE↗
arXiv2026

The Spec Growth Engine: Spec-Anchored, Code-Coupled, Drift-Enforced Architecture for AI-Assisted Software Development

AI coding agents dramatically accelerate implementation speed but introduce two structural failure modes that existing spec-driven approaches do not fully solve: (1) context explosion -- the agent must reason over an entire repository at once, degrading output quality as the context window fills; and (2) silent spec-code drift -- code evolves, the specification does not, and the divergence becomes invisible until it is costly to repair. We present the Spec Growth Engine, a lightweight framework that addresses both failure modes through a machine-readable spec graph whose nodes carry explicit contract/design separation, a Spine context assembler that scopes agent context to an ownership path, a vertical-slice growth protocol that enforces hardest-first ordering, and a drift gate that makes spec-code divergence a blocking merge condition. The design synthesises well-established software engineering principles (Parnas information hiding, C4, ADRs, Walking Skeleton, Reflexion Models, Fitness Functions) into a lean, code-coupled, machine-enforced whole -- without the overhead of heavy-weight frameworks such as RUP or MDA.

cs.SE↗
arXiv2026

Beyond Fault Localization: A Trajectory-Level Study of LLM Agents for Microservice Root Cause Analysis

Automated microservice root cause analysis (RCA) is usually evaluated by whether the final answer localizes the fault source. This is insufficient for on-call site reliability engineers (SREs), who need the evidence and reasoning behind the fault. Evaluating the process is hard because agent trajectories interleave free-form reasoning with heterogeneous tool calls and telemetry results, making it difficult to assess agents' behavior. To assess how well RCA agents ground diagnoses in evidence, we propose a trajectory-analysis methodology that characterizes evidence navigation and utilization, SRE-oriented diagnostic intent, and recurring failure modes. Our key insight is that fault-propagation paths give a causal reference for where agents investigate and how they use evidence. With it, we analyze 5,000 trajectories from ten framework-backbone configurations (nine agent frameworks, two backbone models) on RCABench. Correct localization can hide deficiencies in causal reconstruction. Successful investigations use retrieved evidence to guide later queries, consider broader diagnostic intents, and investigate more deeply. Failed investigations drift toward unrelated services or repeat shallow queries; recurring failures arise from omitted evidence, misinterpreted evidence, and unsupported reasoning. To test whether these patterns can guide improvement, we build a lightweight defense prototype targeting the three failure families. Across two held-out benchmarks, two backbone models, and six diagnostic frameworks, the failure patterns recur; the prototype reduces their prevalence and raises Acc@1 by 3.5-35.1 percentage points in every configuration, suggesting that the mined failures generalize and are actionable. Our findings motivate a process-level view of automated RCA, in which trajectories reveal whether a diagnosis is correct, well-grounded, and open to improvement.

cs.SE↗