Demonstration venue · read-only. Every page can be browsed; the buttons that would change it are switched off. Create an account to run TaxoReview on your own data. A simulation from public publication records: the people listed were not invited and did not agree to review.
? Tutorial for this page

Konstantinos Vergopoulos

dblp:401/9215 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
1ranked-venue papers
1as first author
1since 2021 · last 2025
—ORCID · none

Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several

Artificial intelligence and machine learning · 1 · 1 first-author · 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
Software testing · 67% Empirical software engineering · 33%

Topics — the 3 heaviest of 3, each with the papers that count most for it

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Software testing › test infrastructure
benchmark construction
0.912025
Automated Benchmark Generation for Repository-Level Coding Tasks · ICML 2025
Empirical software engineering
benchmarking
0.912025
Automated Benchmark Generation for Repository-Level Coding Tasks · ICML 2025
Software testing
test generation
0.912025
Automated Benchmark Generation for Repository-Level Coding Tasks · ICML 2025

Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics

test execution · 0.9automated dependency setup · 0.9
YearPublicationVenuePosition
2025 Automated Benchmark Generation for Repository-Level Coding Tasks
abstract
Code Agent development is an extremely active research area, where a reliable performance metric is critical for tracking progress and guiding new developments. This demand is underscored by the meteoric rise in popularity of SWE-Bench -- a benchmark that challenges code agents to generate patches addressing GitHub issues given the full repository as context. The correctness of generated patches is then evaluated by executing a human-written test suite extracted from the repository after the issue's resolution. However, constructing benchmarks like SWE-Bench requires substantial manual effort to set up historically accurate execution environments for testing. Crucially, this severely limits the number of considered repositories, e.g., just 12 for SWE-Bench. Considering so few repositories, selected for their popularity runs the risk of leading to a distributional mismatch, i.e., the measured performance may not be representative of real-world scenarios running the riks of misguiding development efforts. In this work, we address this challenge and introduce SetUpAgent, a fully automated system capable of historically accurate dependency setup, test execution, and result parsing. Using SetUpAgent, we generate two new datasets: (i) SWEE-Bench an extended version of SWE-Bench encompassing hundreds of repositories, and (ii) SWA-Bench a benchmark focusing on applications rather than libraries. Comparing these datasets to SWE-Bench with respect to their characteristics and code agent performance, we find significant distributional differences, including lower issue description quality and detail level, higher fix complexity, and most importantly up to 60% lower agent success rates.
Konstantinos Vergopoulos, Mark Niklas Müller, Martin T. Vechev
ICML1