Richeng Xuan
Publications
TRAJDEBUG: Tracing Error Lifecycle to Identify Critical Failures in Long-Horizon Agent Trajectories
LLM-based agentic systems have shown remarkable capabilities in complex domains, while suffering from cascading errors and difficulty in debugging. Critical error detection aims to locate the earliest error step in a failed trajectory that is responsible for the final failure. However, progress faces two main challenges. First, long trajectories make it difficult to identify individual errors, since the evidence for judging a step may be scattered across distant instructions, observations, and prior context. Second, failed trajectories often contain multiple local errors with different downstream effects, only some of which remain responsible for the final failure. In this work, we propose TrajDebug, an error-lifecycle tracing framework that addresses long-trajectory error discovery with multi-granularity history compression and evidence-based error identification, and supports critical attribution by tracing each error's resolution status and terminal impact. We further construct TrajErrBench, a benchmark of 486 manually annotated failed trajectories from Tau2Bench and SWE-Bench Pro, covering realistic tool-use and coding scenarios. Experiments across diverse agent benchmarks show that TrajDebug achieves the best overall performance over existing baselines, and application studies further demonstrate that its diagnoses provide actionable feedback for improving downstream agent success. We will release the codes and data to facilitate further research.
RepoProbe: Benchmarking Architecture-Aware Repository Comprehension with Checklists
The integration of Large Language Models (LLMs) into software engineering has shifted the focus from function-level generation to repository-scale assistance. However, existing benchmarks largely rely on bug reports from GitHub Issues, which often allow models to bypass genuine understanding via pattern matching on error logs. This misalignment under-measures Edit Bias, which refers to premature generation, where models prematurely propose code modifications instead of understanding the existing repository architecture. Furthermore, current LLM-as-a-Judge scalar scoring suffers from high variance and low interpretability. This work introduces RepoProbe, a novel benchmark for evaluating repository-level code understanding through open-ended Q&A using GitHub Discussions, which focuses on open-ended architectural inquiries rather than defect reporting. To ensure rigorous evaluation, we propose a Checklist-Based Verification Protocol that decomposes answers into atomic, verifiable facts, thereby replacing subjective ratings with objective verification. Our evaluation of state-of-the-art (SOTA) LLMs reveals a persistent gap between high clarity and evidencegrounded technical correctness. It also quantitatively confirms the prevalence of edit bias, in which models prioritize code generation instead of architectural analysis. Finally, we demonstrate that our verification protocol significantly improves evaluation reliability compared to traditional evaluations with scalar scoring.
Trust the uncertain teacher: distilling dark knowledge via calibrated uncertainty
The core of knowledge distillation lies in transferring the teacher's rich 'dark knowledge'-subtle probabilistic patterns that reveal how classes are related and the distribution of uncertainties. While this idea is well established, teachers trained with conventional cross-entropy often fail to preserve such signals. Their distributions collapse into sharp, overconfident peaks that appear decisive but are in fact brittle, offering little beyond the hard label or subtly hindering representation-level transfer. This overconfidence is especially problematic in high-cardinality tasks, where the nuances among many plausible classes matter most for guiding a compact student. Moreover, such brittle targets reduce robustness under distribution shift, leaving students vulnerable to miscalibration in real-world conditions. To address this limitation, we revisit distillation from a distributional perspective and propose Calibrated Uncertainty Distillation (CUD), a framework designed to make dark knowledge more faithfully accessible. Instead of uncritically adopting the teacher's overconfidence, CUD encourages teachers to reveal uncertainty where it is informative and guides students to learn from targets that are calibrated rather than sharpened certainty. By directly shaping the teacher's predictive distribution before transfer, our approach balances accuracy and calibration, allowing students to benefit from both confident signals on easy cases and structured uncertainty on hard ones. Across diverse benchmarks, CUD yields students that are not only more accurate, but also more calibrated under shift and more reliable on ambiguous, long-tail inputs.