Yiling Lou
Publications
SWE-Doctor: Guiding Software Engineering Agents with Runtime Diagnosis from Multi-Faceted Bug Reproduction Tests
Large language model (LLM)-based software engineering agents are increasingly developed to resolve software issues by generating patches from issue reports and code repositories. Bug reproduction tests (BRTs) are an important building block for such agents and have been shown useful for patch validation. However, it remains unclear whether BRTs can also help the more central stage of patch generation. We first conduct a preliminary study and find that directly using advanced BRT generators to guide patch generation is not beneficial: fail-to-fail BRTs can mislead agents, while even fail-to-pass BRTs bring limited or negative gains. Our analysis reveals two reasons: fail-to-pass BRTs may cover only one manifestation of the reported issue, leading to partial patches, whereas fail-to-fail BRTs are unreliable as direct patch-generation targets. Motivated by these insights, we propose SWE-Doctor, a software issue resolution agent that guides patch generation with runtime diagnoses derived from multi-faceted BRT executions. SWE-Doctor first generates multi-faceted BRTs for different behavioral requirements stated in the issue, then executes and debugs these BRTs to construct runtime-grounded diagnosis records, and finally uses the diagnoses together with localization information inferred during BRT generation to guide patch generation and reduce partial patches. We evaluate SWE-Doctor on Python bug-fixing issues from the widely adopted SWE-bench Verified and SWE-bench Pro across five LLM backends. SWE-Doctor consistently outperforms existing agents across all 10 LLM-benchmark combinations, achieving average resolution rates of 75.7% on SWE-bench Verified and 59.4% on SWE-bench Pro. In particular, on the more challenging SWE-bench Pro, SWE-Doctor improves the average resolution rate by 8.0-8.9 percentage points over the baseline agents.
Reducing False Positives in Static Bug Detection with LLMs: An Empirical Study in Industry
Static analysis tools (SATs) are widely adopted in both academia and industry for improving software quality, yet their practical use is often hindered by high false positive rates, especially in large-scale enterprise systems. These false alarms demand substantial manual inspection, creating severe inefficiencies in industrial code review. While recent work has demonstrated the potential of large language models (LLMs) for false alarm reduction on open-source benchmarks, their effectiveness in real-world enterprise settings remains unclear. To bridge this gap, we conduct the first comprehensive empirical study of diverse LLM-based false alarm reduction techniques in an industrial context at Tencent, one of the largest IT companies in China. Using data from Tencent's enterprise-customized SAT on its large-scale Advertising and Marketing Services software, we construct a dataset of 433 alarms (328 false positives, 105 true positives) covering three common bug types. Through interviewing developers and analyzing the data, our results highlight the prevalence of false positives, which wastes substantial manual effort (e.g., 10-20 minutes of manual inspection per alarm). Meanwhile, our results show the huge potential of LLMs for reducing false alarms in industrial settings (e.g., hybrid techniques of LLM and static analysis eliminate 94-98% of false positives with high recall). Furthermore, LLM-based techniques are cost-effective, with per-alarm costs as low as 2.1-109.5 seconds and $0.0011-$0.12, representing orders-of-magnitude savings compared to manual review. Finally, our case analysis further identifies key limitations of LLM-based false alarm reduction in industrial settings.