Demo Data from EDBT 2026 / reviewers in the wild / expert
Ziluo Xue
dblp:426/4041
· DBLP profile ↗
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
Software engineering, systems software and programming languages · 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 |
Empirical software engineering · 100% | |
| Artificial intelligence
1 paper |
Multi-agent systems · 100% |
Topics — the 3 heaviest of 3, each with the papers that count most for it
| Topic | Weight | Papers | Last | Evidence papers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Knowledge, reasoning and agents › Multi-agent systems › agentic AI
LLM agent design |
0.9 | 1 | 2025 | A Characterization Study of Bugs in LLM Agent Workflow Orchestration Frameworks · ASE 2025 |
Empirical software engineering › mining software repositories › bug report analysis
bug characterization |
0.9 | 1 | 2025 | A Characterization Study of Bugs in LLM Agent Workflow Orchestration Frameworks · ASE 2025 |
Empirical software engineering
mining software repositories |
0.9 | 1 | 2025 | A Characterization Study of Bugs in LLM Agent Workflow Orchestration Frameworks · ASE 2025 |
Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics
statistical analysis · 1.7empirical study · 1.7
| Year | Publication | Venue | Position |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2025 | A Characterization Study of Bugs in LLM Agent Workflow Orchestration FrameworksabstractLarge Language Models (LLMs) have rapidly gained popularity, transforming research and industry. To support their adoption, LLM agent workflow orchestration frameworks (hereinafter referred to as LLM agent frameworks) like LangChain have become essential for building advanced applications. However, their complexity makes bugs inevitable, and these bugs can propagate to downstream applications, causing severe failures or unintended behaviors. In this paper, we first present an abstraction of the structure of mainstream LLM agent frameworks, identifying four key architectural components: data preprocessing, core schema, agent construction, and featured modules. Building on this abstraction, we conduct the first empirical study on LLM agent framework bugs, analyzing 1,026 bug instances extracted from 1,577 real-world bug-related GitHub pull requests (PRs) from three popular LLM agent frameworks: LangChain, LlamaIndex, and Haystack. For each bug, we examine its root cause, symptom, and structural component, providing a systematic taxonomy of nine root causes and six symptom categories. Finally, leveraging the framework structure abstraction and the large-scale empirical study, we perform detailed statistical analysis in terms of the distribution of bugs in different frameworks, the distribution across different framework components, and the relationship between root cause and symptom. The analysis reveals unique challenge patterns compared to traditional software, providing actionable guidance for practitioners on quality assurance. Ziluo Xue, Yanjie Zhao 0001, Shenao Wang 0001, Kai Chen 0012, Haoyu Wang 0001 |
ASE | 1 |