Sign inGet started
Paper · arXiv

Groundability, Not Scale Alone: When Weak Reviewers Can Audit Strong Coding Agents

Coding agents can return plausible patches that omit required behavior. These failures are hard to review because long traces and confident summaries often hide what was missed. We ask when a nominally weaker reviewer can reliably decide whether a patch solves its issue. We study 411 execution-labeled traces from three agents and 101 controlled cases. On 154 GPT-5.4 traces, structured but unchecked evidence raises both defect catch and over-rejection. We then provide official execution evidence as an upper-bound diagnostic. After choosing and freezing one of two formats per reviewer, five of six reviewers improve both rates on 122 held-out traces; two classify every trace correctly. Revie...

AuthorsJunyu Guo, Shangding Gu, Ming Jin et al.
Primary categorycs.SE
Published1 October 2026
Last updated at source1 October 2026
cs.SEcs.AIcs.CL
Embed this entry
<iframe src="https://silytics.si/embed/item/eac7e409-5083-4ebd-8dd1-ad61602d13b6" width="420" height="190" style="border:0" loading="lazy" title="Silytics entry"></iframe>

Free, no tracking. More about feeds and embeds.

Popularity, last 2 days

0 now. Counts as reported by the source, snapshotted daily by Silytics.

Silytics shows public metadata from arXiv and links to the original. Information may be incomplete or out of date. Last refreshed 17 October 2026. Licenses and terms of the original apply to the work itself. Not financial, legal or professional advice.