arXiv Science⌕ Search

arXiv · 2609.37985

Merged, Not Measured: An Empirical Study of Performance Issues Fixed by Coding Agents

Abstract

Coding agents open pull requests (PRs) that claim to speed up software, but studies of human performance fixes say little about how maintainers respond to such a fix or whether its claim holds. From the 71,677 agent PRs of AIDev v4, a text filter and codebook coding by language models and by the authors select 1,262 performance issues fixed by six agents in 582 repositories. We code each issue and its tests and re-execute 23 rejected and 30 merged fixes. (1) 57% of closed fixes are merged, 61% of rejections give no stated reason, and only 6 of the 23 re-executed rejected claims held under our three-run pilot on mostly agent-built workloads. (2) Acceptance rises with the agent's track record in the repository (31-37% to 70%) and with the repository's pre-opening merge rate on its other agent PRs (33% to 84%). Merged fixes delete a larger share of the lines they change (0.26 versus 0.15), a difference that holds within agent and within repository, with no such difference detected in the coded content, description, tests or measurements. (3) Repeated computation and redundant data processing cause 44% of the issues, and 46% of fixes are architectural-level. (4) Agents change tests in 37% of fixes and 11% carry a performance test or benchmark; of the 30 merged fixes, 18 met our delivery criterion, 3 fell short of the claim, 9 showed no significant gain or regressed, and 14 change behavior on untested inputs. The outcome tracks the repository's history with the agent rather than the coded content of the fix, and a merge does not show that the fix delivers what it claims.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Zhenyu Qi, Haotang Li, Jinfu Chen, Huashan Chen, Yutong Zhao, Derui Zhu, Tomas Cerny, Bo Liu, Sen He. 2026-09-29. Merged, Not Measured: An Empirical Study of Performance Issues Fixed by Coding Agents. https://arxiv.org/abs/2609.37985

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

Specification Before Generation: A Pre-Registered, Five-Model Paired Evaluation of a Specification Frame for LLM-Generated Code in Money, Time, Idempotency, and Access Tasks

Code generated by large language models passes security checks at a rate that has barely moved in four years. In regulated backends, the defect classes that matter most are money arithmetic, time handling, retry safety, and access control. Teams answer with instruction files, yet the largest controlled study of instruction files we are aware of found no general benefit. This paper tests a narrower idea: generated code improves when the prompt carries a specification, a fixed preamble stating what must be true of the result. We pre-registered hypotheses, refuters, analysis code, and a one-shot generation rule, then ran 50 realistic backend tasks from finance, healthcare, and insurance practice through five frontier models from five vendor lineages, each task twice: bare, and preceded by a 267-word filled specification frame. Nine deterministic AST-based checkers scored the outputs. The Bandit security scanner, which knows nothing of the frame, scored them independently. The frame reduced defects in all five models (mean reduction 0.16 to 0.70 findings per task, every Holm-adjusted sign test significant, every bootstrap confidence interval excluding zero). Where the arms differed, the frame arm won 95 of 100 times. It never made any model worse in any domain. Bandit found 53 medium-or-high issues in the bare arm and 11 in the frame arm, in the same direction for every model. The effect was largest where a model's unprompted defaults were weakest: the frame supplies the discipline a model lacks. All 500 outputs, prompts, checkers, scoring code, and the pre-registration are published with a DOI, so any team can re-derive the result without trusting the author.

cs.SE↗

Adaptive-GEPA: Make Your Harness Fit Heterogeneous Requests

Reflective optimizers such as GEPA improve language model prompts from execution traces and evaluator feedback; full-program extensions can also rewrite tools and control flow. In practice, a user hands the same endpoint heterogeneous requests whose effective solutions require different tools, reasoning modes, and control flow. Optimizing one shared program leaves this division of work implicit in source-code search, while optimizing a separate program per request family fixes it beforehand. We introduce Adaptive-GEPA, which learns both how to divide requests and how to solve them. It evolves a router and a library of specialist programs under one search budget. The router's instructions, each specialist's description, and its program code are plain, human-readable text, edited from feedback. To combine branches, it aligns specialists by the requests they handle and inherits descriptions together with programs. On a fixed mixture of four task families, the reported Qwen3-8B run evolves four experts without supplying family labels to the router or reflection model; its routing matches the task partition on all 651 test requests. Its family-mean test score (x100) rises from 52.6 to 70.6, compared with 62.5 for GEPA's full-program adapter and 54.0 for GRPO at a nominal budget of 18,000 scored calls. These counts do not equate total compute. Figure 1 summarizes the learning curves, final test scores, and routing agreement.

cs.SE↗

Toward Quantum Software Automation: A Quantum-Aware Harness for LLM-Guided Evolution

Quantum software is critical for improving the efficiency and reliability of scarce quantum hardware. However, its design still relies heavily on ad-hoc, handcrafted heuristics that are often suboptimal and quickly become obsolete as quantum hardware evolves. LLM-guided evolutionary search offers a promising way to automatically explore complex software designs, but existing search frameworks lack the quantum-specific support needed for efficient evolution: verification is expensive, feedback is sparse, and heterogeneous quantum programs require different optimization objectives. In this paper, we present QSA, a quantum-aware harness for LLM-guided evolutionary search toward automating quantum software design. QSA equips the search with three forms of quantum-specific guidance: an evolution-hardness-guided coreset and approximate scoring to reduce verification cost, static and snapshot analyses to provide fine-grained execution context, and task-specific rewards for compiler passes and runtime policies. We evaluate QSA on the IBM Quantum platform across three benchmark suites. For multiprogramming, QSA improves QPU utilization by 4.2%-9.5% and Hellinger fidelity by 15.2%-19.5% over the state of the art. For error mitigation, QSA reduces mitigation time by at least 96.8% while achieving comparable or better fidelity. These gains require only $6.9 in LLM API cost over 11.3 hours.

cs.SE↗