When Large Language Models Confront Repository-Level Automatic Program Repair: How Well They Done?
<|reference_start|>When Large Language Models Confront Repository-Level Automatic Program Repair: How Well They Done?: In recent years, large language models (LLMs) have demonstrated substantial potential in addressing automatic program repair (APR) tasks. However, the current evaluation of these models for APR tasks focuses solely on the limited context of the single function or file where the bug is located, overlooking the valuable information in the repository-level context. This paper investigates the performance of popular LLMs in handling repository-level repair tasks. We introduce RepoBugs, a new benchmark comprising 124 typical repository-level bugs from open-source repositories. Preliminary experiments using GPT3.5 based on the function where the error is located, reveal that the repair rate on RepoBugs is only 22.58%, significantly diverging from the performance of GPT3.5 on function-level bugs in related studies. This underscores the importance of providing repository-level context when addressing bugs at this level. However, the repository-level context offered by the preliminary method often proves redundant and imprecise and easily exceeds the prompt length limit of LLMs. To solve the problem, we propose a simple and universal repository-level context extraction method (RLCE) designed to provide more precise context for repository-level code repair tasks. Evaluations of three mainstream LLMs show that RLCE significantly enhances the ability to repair repository-level bugs. The improvement reaches a maximum of 160% compared to the preliminary method. Additionally, we conduct a comprehensive analysis of the effectiveness and limitations of RLCE, along with the capacity of LLMs to address repository-level bugs, offering valuable insights for future research.<|reference_end|>
@article{chen2024when,
    title={When Large Language Models Confront Repository-Level Automatic Program
  Repair: How Well They Done?},
    author={Yuxiao Chen, Jingzheng Wu, Xiang Ling, Changjiang Li, Zhiqing Rui,
  Tianyue Luo, Yanjun Wu},
    journal={arXiv preprint arXiv:2403.00448},
    year={2024},
    archivePrefix={arXiv},
    eprint={2403.00448},
    primaryClass={cs.SE}
}