arXiv preprint ·
Detecting Incorrect LLM Explanations for Automated Program Repair
- Published
- Source
- arXiv preprint, posted before peer review
- Original
- Read it at arXiv
- Topics
Abstract
LLM-generated explanations help developers understand automated program repair (APR) rationale and assess patch quality. Incorrect explanations can mislead developers about a repair's reliability, making their detection important. However, manually inspecting the growing volume of generated repairs is impractical, motivating automated detection. Existing methods mainly target incorrect answers from general question-answering LLMs, often by sampling multiple responses and detecting contradictions. Applied to APR, they face two limitations: (1) they may depend on external verifiers that are unavailable or lack APR-specific reasoning; and (2) sampling strategies such as paraphrasing or re-prompting the same input often yield superficial, redundant responses that repeat the original error rather than expose it. We propose MetaReJ, the first method designed to detect incorrect APR explanations using metamorphic testing. Inspired by debate and viva examinations, MetaReJ challenges explanations through an argumentative strategy without requiring external verifiers. It applies novel metamorphic relations (MRs) to recursively question the LLM under equivalent and non-equivalent repair scenarios and detect contradictions. To obtain diverse samples, MetaReJ transforms the buggy program into variants that preserve or alter the underlying bug, then asks the LLM how to repair each variant. Contradictions among responses are encoded as MR violations, which indicate that the original explanation is incorrect. We evaluate MetaReJ on a manually labelled dataset of 1,756 explanations from multiple LLM-based APR systems. MetaReJ achieves an MCC of up to 0.43, outperforming prior methods by up to 333.3% in MCC.
The authors’ abstract, as arXiv lists it. arXiv’s listings, abstracts included, are free for anyone to reuse.
Read it on ReadSearch
Each opens after you create an account, and brings you back to this paper.
More in Software Engineering
Template-Free Dynamic Invariant Detection
Do Open-Source Video Ad Clients Follow VAST 4.3? An Empirical Study of Player Conformance
Mentorship, Interrupted: How GenAI Disrupts the GSoC Pipeline and Why Mentors Matter More
PyReprism: A Shared Lexical Foundation for Polyglot Code Analysis
Scaling Lean Theorem Proving for Real-World Code Verification
Get the few papers worth your time in Software Engineering every morning.
ReadSearch reads the new papers in your field each day and brings you the few worth reading, each with its key finding in a sentence.