Skip to content

BoostAPR: Boosting Automated Program Repair via Execution-Grounded Reinforcement Learning with Dual Reward Models

May 2026 · arXiv.org · Vol abs/2605.09134 · 3 citations · ⚡ 1 influential · 44 references
Computer Science

TL;DR

BoostAPR is presented, a three-stage framework addressing challenges of supervised fine-tuning on execution-verified demonstrations with reasoning traces, training dual reward models from execution outcomes, and PPO optimization where the line-level model redistributes rewards to critical edit regions.

Abstract

Reinforcement learning for program repair is hindered by sparse execution feedback and coarse sequence-level rewards that obscure which edits actually fix bugs. We present BoostAPR, a three-stage framework addressing these challenges: (1) supervised fine-tuning on execution-verified demonstrations with reasoning traces, (2) training dual reward models--a sequence-level assessor and a line-level credit allocator--from execution outcomes, and (3) PPO optimization where the line-level model redistributes rewards to critical edit regions. This line-level credit assignment operates at an intermediate granularity naturally suited to code changes. Trained on SWE-Gym and evaluated on four benchmarks, BoostAPR achieves 40.7% on SWE-bench Verified (+22.9pp over base model), 24.8% on Defects4J (Python-to-Java transfer), 84.5% on HumanEval-Java, and 95.0% on QuixBugs, achieving competitive results among open-source models with strong cross-language generalization.

View source

Similar papers

Preprint Oct 2026

Co-Evolving Policy and Reward for Code Generation: A Mechanistic Study of Single-Adapter Drift

Reinforcement learning with verifiable rewards (RLVR) is particularly well suited to code generation because generated programs can be objectively evaluated through execution. Execution also provides behavioral information that can be reused as additional supervision. The Synergistic Policy and Reward Co-Evolving Frame...

Amarsaikhan Batjargal, Noriko Tomuro · 0 citations
#machine learning Preprint Oct 2026

Function-Structured Reinforcement Learning with Executable Verifiers for Mathematical Reasoning

Algorithmic mathematical reasoning requires reliable decomposition, computation, and aggregation. Final-answer rewards provide limited guidance on intermediate errors, while successful execution does not guarantee mathematical correctness. This work proposes Function-Structured Graph Reinforcement Learning (FSG-RL), co...

Zi-Han Liu, Xu-Rong Xie · 0 citations
#artificial intelligence Preprint Oct 2026

Learning to Reason with Selective Internal Feedback

Reinforcement learning from internal feedback can improve language models without ground-truth answers or external verifiers. However, confidence and correctness can diverge during training, and continued optimization of average self-certainty can increase confidence while degrading reasoning accuracy. We introduce SIF...

Xu-Zheng-Long-Wang Lu, Shu-Meng Yang, Xin-Rui Wang et al. · 0 citations
#artificial intelligence Preprint Oct 2026

PreciseCoder: Faithful and Generalizable Debugging Beyond Unit-Test Rewards

Reinforcement learning (RL) from unit tests is the common recipe for post-training code models, but a unit test only asks whether the final program passes. We analyze what this unit-test-only reward teaches a model during debugging and find that, while it raises pass rates, it also teaches the model to edit more and to...

Yun-Kai Zhan, Miao-Sen Chai, Shang-Shang Wang et al. · 0 citations
#machine learning Preprint Sep 2026

Teach to Learn: Hint Annealing for Self-improving LLM Reasoning

HATCH (Hint-Annealed Self-Teaching), an online single-policy framework that learns from both generating and using its own hints to improve reasoning without assistance, is proposed and gradient projection is used to remove the opposing component of hint-generation updates.

Zi-Le Wang, Zi-Jian Li, Hao-Dong Wang et al. · 0 citations
#artificial intelligence Preprint Oct 2026

Dependency-Aware Reward Shaping for Agentic Reinforcement Learning

When training large language models with reinforcement learning, terminal rewards provide little guidance about which steps matter. Common methods for assigning step credit overlook that work built on uncorrected mistakes is wasted while independent work remains valid. With only a final success/failure reward, every st...

Zi-Yi Chen, Yan Zhang, Jian-Hui Wei et al. · 0 citations

Related blog posts

We use cookies to run the site and, with your consent, for analytics and to show ads. See our Cookie Policy.