Beyond Accuracy: Behavioral Dynamics of Agentic Multi-Hunk Repair

November 14, 2025 Β· Declared Dead Β· πŸ› arXiv.org

πŸ‘» CAUSE OF DEATH: Ghosted
No code link whatsoever

"No code URL or promise found in abstract"

Evidence collected by the PWNC Scanner

Authors Noor Nashid, Daniel Ding, Keheliya Gallaba, Ahmed E. Hassan, Ali Mesbah arXiv ID 2511.11012 Category cs.SE: Software Engineering Citations 0 Venue arXiv.org Last Checked 5 months ago
Abstract
Automated program repair has traditionally focused on single-hunk defects, overlooking multi-hunk bugs that are prevalent in real-world systems. Repairing these bugs requires coordinated edits across multiple, disjoint code regions, posing substantially greater challenges. We present the first systematic study of LLM-driven coding agents (Claude Code, Codex, Gemini-cli, and Qwen Code) on this task. We evaluate these agents on 372 multi-hunk bugs from the Hunk4J dataset, analyzing 1,488 repair trajectories using fine-grained metrics that capture localization, repair accuracy, regression behavior, and operational dynamics. Results reveal substantial variation: repair accuracy ranges from 25.8% (Qwen Code) to 93.3% (Claude Code) and consistently declines with increasing bug dispersion and complexity. High-performing agents demonstrate superior semantic consistency, achieving positive regression reduction, whereas lower-performing agents often introduce new test failures. Notably, agents do not fail fast; failed repairs consume substantially more resources (39%-343% more tokens) and require longer execution time (43%-427%). Additionally, we developed Maple to provide agents with repository-level context. Empirical results show that Maple improves the repair accuracy of Gemini-cli by 30% through enhanced localization. By analyzing fine-grained metrics and trajectory-level analysis, this study moves beyond accuracy to explain how coding agents localize, reason, and act during multi-hunk repair.
Community shame:
Not yet rated
Community Contributions

Found the code? Know the venue? Think something is wrong? Let us know!

πŸ“œ Similar Papers

In the same crypt β€” Software Engineering

Died the same way β€” πŸ‘» Ghosted