SearcharxivSearch

arXiv subjects

Daniel Penner

Publications and source records attributed to Daniel Penner.

2 recordsLinked to original sources

Evaluating Loss Functions in Differentiable Out-of-Domain Sound-Matching with Partial Parameter Distance

In out-of-domain (OOD) sound-matching, a synthesizer is optimized to mimic a sound it did not generate. OOD evaluation of loss functions is underexplored in part because the standard "parameter loss" metric requires a shared parameter space between target and imitator, which OOD settings lack. We introduce Partial Parameter Distance (PPD), which applies parameter loss only to the critical parameters that mismatched synthesizers share (e.g., filter cutoffs), enabling automatically evaluated OOD experiments; we verify its results with blinded listening tests. Across seven scenarios involving band-pass filtering, amplitude modulation, and pitch-bending, we evaluate four differentiable loss functions (SIMSE_Spec, L1_Spec, JTFS, DTW_Envelope). Loss-function effectiveness remains tightly coupled to the method of synthesis: SIMSE_Spec excels at filter-cutoff recovery, DTW_Envelope at amplitude-modulation recovery, and JTFS at smooth pitch trajectories. Parameter-based evaluation agrees with listening tests on the top-ranked loss function in five of seven scenarios, demonstrating its utility as a diagnostic tool.

cs.SD

How do Agents Refactor: An Empirical Study

Software development agents such as Claude Code, GitHub Copilot, Cursor Agent, Devin, and OpenAI Codex are being increasingly integrated into developer workflows. While prior work has evaluated agent capabilities for code completion and task automation, there is little work investigating how these agents perform Java refactoring in practice, the types of changes they make, and their impact on code quality. In this study, we present the first analysis of agentic refactoring pull requests in Java, comparing them to developer refactorings across 86 projects per group. Using RefactoringMiner and DesigniteJava 3.0, we identify refactoring types and detect code smells before and after refactoring commits. Our results show that agent refactorings are dominated by annotation changes (the 5 most common refactoring types done by agents are annotation related), in contrast to the diverse structural improvements typical of developers. Despite these differences in refactoring types, we find Cursor to be the only model to show a statistically significant increase in refactoring smells.

cs.SE