Mehil B Shah, Mohammad Masudur Rahman, Foutse Khomh
Paper appears method- or tooling-adjacent to AI workflows with partial ecosystem coverage.
Despite their wide adoption in various domains (e.g., healthcare, finance, software engineering), Deep Learning (DL)-based applications suffer from many bugs, failures, and vulnerabilities. Reproducing these bugs is essential for their resolution, but it is extremely challenging due to the inherent nondeterminism of DL models and their tight coupling with hardware and software environments. According to recent studie ...
s, only about 3% of DL bugs can be reliably reproduced using manual approaches. To address these challenges, we present RepGen, a novel, automated, and intelligent approach for reproducing deep learning bugs. RepGen constructs a learning-enhanced context from a project, develops a comprehensive plan for bug reproduction, employs an iterative generate-validate-refine mechanism, and thus generates such code using an LLM that reproduces the bug at hand. We evaluate RepGen on 106 real-world deep learning bugs and achieve a reproduction rate of 80.19%, a 19.81% improvement over the state-of-the-art measure. A developer study involving 27 participants shows that RepGen improves the success rate of DL bug reproduction by 23.35%, reduces the time to reproduce by 56.8%, and lowers participants' cognitive load.
No concrete benchmark grounding is available yet. Treat the page as context or an implementation starting point only.
Despite their wide adoption in various domains (e.g., healthcare, finance, software engineering), Deep Learning (DL)-based applications suffer from many bugs, failures, and vulnerabilities.
Recommendation evidence is currently too limited for a maintained-repo choice. Use Implementation Status and Reproduction Path for a practical baseline plan.
Hardware Notes
Expect multi-day setup/compute for meaningful reproduction based on current guidance.
Evidence graph: 2 refs, 1 links.
Utility signals: depth 60/100, grounding 58/100, status medium.
Compare maintenance quality, reproducibility coverage, and evidence confidence before choosing a reproduction baseline.
Matched via arXiv identifier search · Strong overlap with paper title keywords
Risk flags
Matched via arXiv identifier search
Risk flags
There is no verified maintained implementation yet. Use this baseline plan to decide whether to prototype now or defer.
Hardware requirements
No verified implementation available
No benchmark numbers could be verified. You will not be able to validate reproduction correctness against published numbers.
No additional verified repositories beyond the primary recommendation.
These repositories had low-confidence matching signals and are hidden by default.
No trustworthy direct or curated related Hugging Face artifacts were found yet.
Continue with targeted Hugging Face searches derived from the paper title and method context:
Datasets
Tip: start with models, then check datasets/spaces if you need evaluation data or demos.
Direct artifact matches are currently sparse. Use targeted Hugging Face searches to quickly locate candidate models, datasets, and demos.
Tasks
Agentic tool use
Methods
Transformer
Domains
Large Language Models, AI Agents
Evaluation & Human Feedback Data
Open this paper in HFEPX to review benchmark signals, evaluation modes, and human-feedback protocol context.
Open in HFEPXExplore Similar Papers
Jump to Paper2Code search queries derived from this paper's research context.
Need human evaluators for your AI research? Scale annotation with expert AI Trainers.