A Multi-Agent Approach to Fault Localization via Graph-Based Retrieval and Reflexion
September 20, 2024 Β· Declared Dead Β· + Add venue
"No code URL or promise found in abstract"
Evidence collected by the PWNC Scanner
Authors
Md Nakhla Rafi, Dong Jae Kim, Tse-Hsun Chen, Shaowei Wang
arXiv ID
2409.13642
Category
cs.SE: Software Engineering
Citations
8
Last Checked
4 months ago
Abstract
Identifying and resolving software faults remains a challenging and resource-intensive process. Traditional fault localization techniques, such as Spectrum-Based Fault Localization (SBFL), leverage statistical analysis of test coverage but often suffer from limited accuracy. While learning-based approaches improve fault localization, they demand extensive training datasets and high computational resources. Recent advances in Large Language Models (LLMs) offer new opportunities by enhancing code understanding and reasoning. However, existing LLM-based fault localization techniques face significant challenges, including token limitations, performance degradation with long inputs, and scalability issues in complex software systems. To overcome these obstacles, we propose LLM4FL, a multi-agent fault localization framework that utilizes three specialized LLM agents. First, the Context Extraction Agent applies an order-sensitive segmentation strategy to partition large coverage data within the LLM's token limit, analyze failure context, and prioritize failure-related methods. The Debugger Agent then processes the extracted data, which employs graph-based retrieval-augmented code navigation to reason about failure causes and rank suspicious methods. Finally, the Reviewer Agent re-evaluates the identified faulty methods using verbal reinforcement learning, engaging in self-criticism and iterative refinement. Evaluated on the Defects4J (V2.0.0) benchmark, which includes 675 faults from 14 Java projects, LLM4FL achieves an 18.55\% improvement in Top-1 accuracy over AutoFL and 4.82\% over SoapFL. It outperforms supervised techniques such as DeepFL and Grace, all without requiring task-specific training. Furthermore, its coverage segmentation and prompt chaining strategies enhance performance, increasing Top-1 accuracy by up to 22\%.
Community Contributions
Found the code? Know the venue? Think something is wrong? Let us know!
π Similar Papers
In the same crypt β Software Engineering
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
Microservices: yesterday, today, and tomorrow
π
π
The Cartographer
A Survey of Machine Learning for Big Code and Naturalness
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
An Overview on Smart Contracts: Challenges, Advances and Platforms
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
Slither: A Static Analysis Framework For Smart Contracts
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
ContractFuzzer: Fuzzing Smart Contracts for Vulnerability Detection
Died the same way β π» Ghosted
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
Federated Learning: Strategies for Improving Communication Efficiency
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
In-Datacenter Performance Analysis of a Tensor Processing Unit
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
Deep Convolutional Neural Networks for Computer-Aided Detection: CNN Architectures, Dataset Characteristics and Transfer Learning
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted