Abstract:Automated Program Repair (APR) helps improve the efficiency of software development and maintenance. Recent APR techniques use deep learning, particularly the encoder-decoder architecture, to generate patches. Though existing DL-based APR approaches have proposed different encoder architectures, the decoder remains to be the standard one, which generates a sequence of tokens one by one to replace the faulty statement. This decoder has multiple limitations: 1) allowing to generate syntactically incorrect programs, 2) inefficiently representing small edits, and 3) not being able to generate project-specific identifiers. In this paper, we propose Recoder, a syntax-guided edit decoder with placeholder generation. Recoder is novel in multiple aspects: 1) Recoder generates edits rather than modified code, allowing efficient representation of small edits; 2) Recoder is syntax-guided, with the novel provider/decider architecture to ensure the syntactic correctness of the patched program and accurate generation; 3) Recoder generates placeholders that could be instantiated as project-specific identifiers later. We conduct experiments to evaluate Recoder on 395 bugs from Defects4J v1.2, 420 additional bugs from Defects4J v2.0, 297 bugs from IntroClassJava and 40 bugs from QuixBugs. Our results show that Recoder repairs 53 bugs on Defects4J v1.2, which achieves 26.2% (11 bugs) improvement over the previous state-of-the-art approach for single-hunk bugs (TBar). Importantly, to our knowledge, Recoder is the first DL-based APR approach that has outperformed the traditional APR approaches on this benchmark. Furthermore, Recoder repairs 19 bugs on the additional bugs from Defects4J v2.0, which is 137.5% (11 bugs) more than TBar and 850% (17 bugs) more than SimFix. Recoder also achieves 775% (31 bugs) and 30.8% (4 bugs) improvement on IntroClassJava and QuixBugs over the baselines respectively. These results suggest that Recoder has better generalizability than existing APR approaches.

Automatic Program Repair with Improved Transformer.

The Future Can’t Help Fix the Past: Assessing Program Repair in the Wild

NARRepair: Non-Autoregressive Code Generation Model for Automatic Program Repair

A Survey of Learning-based Automated Program Repair

RePair: Automated Program Repair with Process-based Feedback

Hybrid Automated Program Repair by Combining Large Language Models and Program Analysis

Syntax Guided Neural Program Repair

Less Training, More Repairing Please: Revisiting Automated Program Repair via Zero-shot Learning

Tare: Type-Aware Neural Program Repair

Improving Automated Program Repair with Domain Adaptation

Confix: Combining Node-Level Fix Templates and Masked Language Model for Automatic Program Repair

Enhancing Automated Program Repair with Solution Design

FastFixer: An Efficient and Effective Approach for Repairing Programming Assignments

RepairLLaMA: Efficient Representations and Fine-Tuned Adapters for Program Repair

A Novel Approach for Automatic Program Repair using Round-Trip Translation with Large Language Models

Using the Deep Learning-Based Approaches for Program Debugging and Repair

A Syntax-Guided Edit Decoder for Neural Program Repair

Exploring Parameter-Efficient Fine-Tuning of Large Language Model on Automated Program Repair

Generalized Transformer in Fault Diagnosis of Tennessee Eastman Process

CURE: Code-Aware Neural Machine Translation for Automatic Program Repair

KNOD: Domain Knowledge Distilled Tree Decoder for Automated Program Repair.