Papers for

automated debugging teams

Papers whose findings have a practical use for this group, as judged from the abstract. Open a paper to read what it means in practice.

Self-correction in coding agents improves program fixes with adaptive evidence weighting

How Much Evidence Should a Coding Agent's Self-Correction Carry? Adaptive Dirichlet Evidence for Self-Distillation

Abstract: Execution feedback lets coding agents revise programs and learn from their own corrections. A correction's learning weight should reflect both the transitions supported by its executions and the amount of evidence behind that support. We introduce Effective-Evidence Self-Distillation (EESD), which represents these quantities separately. Normalized execution relevance determines relative transition support and an effective pseudo-count mass; a Dirichlet posterior then produces an uncertainty-penalized weight for KL-anchored correction learning. Under a symmetric prior, changing mass preserves category ordering, and effective mass yields a supervised coefficient bounded by its matched fixed-mass counterpart. Across four model-domain history sweeps, increasing visible observations from one to eight reduces future-outcome NLL by 55.0-59.3%. At eight observations, effective mass achieves lower NLL than fixed mass in all four comparisons. In the primary matched DeepSeek/RunBugRun study, argmax predictions agree on all 3,000 examples, with the largest NLL gain under concentrated relevance. After one correction-learning round, DeepSeek/CodeARC all-tests Pass@1 increases from 15.0% to 20.4%, with a paired 95% source-bootstrap interval of [+2.8, +8.0] percentage points. The twelve-setting downstream evaluation establishes the model-domain scope of this update. These results show how separating evidence support from evidence mass changes probability estimation and correction learning in coding agents.

Tue 6 OctArtificial IntelligenceSoftware Engineering
The gist
Coding agents that write or fix programs learn better when they weigh their own mistakes correctly. The authors created a method called Effective-Evidence Self-Distillation that helps these agents figure out how much to trust the evidence from their past corrections. This method treats how relevant the feedback is and how much information supports it as separate things, improving the learning process. When tested, this approach helped models write more accurate code and improved their success rate on coding tests.
Open → 2610.08514v1

Reinforcement learning uncovers all minimal explanations for outcomes

Minimal Witness Reinforcement Learning

Abstract: ``What are the irreducible conditions that are sufficient to produce an outcome?'' is one of the most common questions that recur across computation and science. Its answers, the minimal sufficient witnesses, are what we mean by explanations, mechanisms and reasons. These problems usually ask for multiple minimal witnesses, yet standard RL methods may reveal only one solution or redundant ones. We formalize this problem as minimal-witness identification and introduce Minimal-Witness Reinforcement Learning (MWRL). MWRL takes the union of the sets certified by successful proposals sampled from the policy and credits each proposal for the coverage the group union would lose without that proposal. This credit assignment, derived directly from the problem definition, unifies the demands for minimality and recovery of alternatives from a single black-box verifier bit. Under this principle, we derive a value iteration planner that recovers the entire family of witnesses and a policy gradient method that can scale to large language models. Across different experimental settings, MWRL recovers most minimal witnesses, while other methods return redundant supersets or a single witness. By making witness families learnable from verifier feedback, MWRL expands the scope of reinforcement learning beyond single-solution optimization. Our code is available at https://github.com/TSUITUENYUE/MWRL.

Mon 5 OctMachine LearningArtificial IntelligenceComputation and Language
The gist
Sometimes we want to know the smallest set of conditions that caused something to happen. The paper introduces a way for AI systems to find all these minimal reasons, not just one. The authors create a new reinforcement learning method that learns from a simple yes-or-no checker to find all unique minimal sets. Their approach works better than previous ones which often find only one answer or many redundant ones. This helps AI better explain its decisions by showing all the minimal causes.
Open → 2610.07226v1