Demo Data from EDBT 2026 / reviewers in the wild / expert
Sicheng Zhong
dblp:276/6419
· DBLP profile ↗
1ranked-venue papers
0as first author
1since 2021 · last 2024
—ORCID · none
Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several
Artificial intelligence and machine learning · 1 · 1 since 2021
Expertise — from the expertise taxonomy: the topics of the expert's papers under the CCF categories. A weight counts papers with recency: 1 for a paper about the topic, 0.3 when the topic is its context, halved every five years.
| Software engineering, system software, and programming languages
1 paper |
Debugging and program repair · 100% |
Topics — the 2 heaviest of 2, each with the papers that count most for it
| Topic | Weight | Papers | Last | Evidence papers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Debugging and program repair › automated program repair
LLM-based program repair |
0.8 | 1 | 2024 | Code Repair with LLMs gives an Exploration-Exploitation Tradeoff · NeurIPS 2024 |
Debugging and program repair › automated program repair
test-based program repair |
0.2 | 1 | 2024 | Code Repair with LLMs gives an Exploration-Exploitation Tradeoff · NeurIPS 2024 |
Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics
thompson sampling · 0.8large language model · 0.8arm-acquiring bandits · 0.8
| Year | Publication | Venue | Position |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2024 | Code Repair with LLMs gives an Exploration-Exploitation TradeoffabstractIteratively improving and repairing source code with large language models (LLMs), known as refinement, has emerged as a popular way of generating programs that would be too complex to construct in one shot. Given a bank of test cases, together with a candidate program, an LLM can improve that program by being prompted with failed test cases. But it remains an open question how to best iteratively refine code, with prior work employing simple greedy or breadth-first strategies. We show here that refinement exposes an explore-exploit tradeoff: exploit by refining the program that passes the most test cases, or explore by refining a lesser considered program. We frame this as an arm-acquiring bandit problem, which we solve with Thompson Sampling. The resulting LLM-based program synthesis algorithm is broadly applicable: Across loop invariant synthesis, visual reasoning puzzles, and competition programming problems, we find that our new method can solve more problems using fewer language model calls. Hao Tang 0008, Keya Hu, Sicheng Zhong, Wei-Long Zheng, Xujie Si, Kevin Ellis |
NeurIPS | 4 |