Researcher profile

Shangwen Wang

Shangwen Wang contributes to research discovery and scholarly infrastructure.

ResearcherAffiliation not importedOpen to collaborate

Trust snapshot

Quick read

Trust 19 - UnverifiedVerification L1Unclaimed author
5works
0followers
2topics
4close collaborators

Actions

Decide how to stay connected

Follow researcher0

Identity and collaboration

How to connect with this researcher

Claiming links this public author record to a researcher profile and unlocks direct collaboration workflows.

Log in to claim

Direct collaboration

Open a focused conversation when the fit is right

Claim this author entity first to unlock direct invitations.

Research graph

See the researcher in context

Open full explorer

Inspect adjacent work, topics, institutions and collaborators without jumping out to a separate graph page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Published work

5 published item(s)

preprint2026arXiv

AdaptEval: A Benchmark for Evaluating Large Language Models on Code Snippet Adaptation

Recent advancements in large language models (LLMs) have automated various software engineering tasks, with benchmarks emerging to evaluate their capabilities. However, for adaptation, a critical activity during code reuse, there is no benchmark to assess LLMs' performance, leaving their practical utility in this area unclear. To fill this gap, we propose AdaptEval, a benchmark designed to evaluate LLMs on code snippet adaptation. Unlike existing benchmarks, AdaptEval incorporates the following three distinctive features: First, Practical Context. Tasks in AdaptEval are derived from developers' practices, preserving rich contextual information from Stack Overflow and GitHub communities. Second, Multi-granularity Annotation. Each task is annotated with requirements at both task and adaptation levels, supporting the evaluation of LLMs across diverse adaptation scenarios. Third, Fine-grained Evaluation. AdaptEval includes a two-tier testing framework combining adaptation-level and function-level tests, which enables evaluating LLMs' performance across various individual adaptations. Based on AdaptEval, we conduct the first empirical study to evaluate six instruction-tuned LLMs and especially three reasoning LLMs on code snippet adaptation. Experimental results demonstrate that AdaptEval enables the assessment of LLMs' adaptation capabilities from various perspectives. It also provides critical insights into their current limitations, particularly their struggle to follow explicit instructions. We hope AdaptEval can facilitate further investigation and enhancement of LLMs' capabilities in code snippet adaptation, supporting their real-world applications.

preprint2026arXiv

Atomizer: An LLM-based Collaborative Multi-Agent Framework for Intent-Driven Commit Untangling

Composite commits, which entangle multiple unrelated concerns, are prevalent in software development and significantly hinder program comprehension and maintenance. Existing automated untangling methods, particularly state-of-the-art graph clustering-based approaches, are fundamentally limited by two issues. (1) They over-rely on structural information, failing to grasp the crucial semantic intent behind changes, and (2) they operate as ``single-pass'' algorithms, lacking a mechanism for the critical reflection and refinement inherent in human review processes. To overcome these challenges, we introduce Atomizer, a novel collaborative multi-agent framework for composite commit untangling. To address the semantic deficit, Atomizer employs an Intent-Oriented Chain-of-Thought (IO-CoT) strategy, which prompts large language models (LLMs) to infer the intent of each code change according to both the structure and the semantic information of code. To overcome the limitations of ``single-pass'' grouping, we employ two agents to establish a grouper-reviewer collaborative refinement loop, which mirrors human review practices by iteratively refining groupings until all changes in a cluster share the same underlying semantic intent. Extensive experiments on two benchmark C# and Java datasets demonstrate that Atomizer significantly outperforms several representative baselines. On average, it surpasses the state-of-the-art graph-based methods by over 6.0% on the C# dataset and 5.5% on the Java dataset. This superiority is particularly pronounced on complex commits, where Atomizer's performance advantage widens to over 16%.

preprint2026arXiv

Coding in a Bubble? Evaluating LLMs in Resolving Context Adaptation Bugs During Code Adaptation

Code adaptation is a fundamental but challenging task in software development, requiring developers to modify existing code for new contexts. A key challenge is to resolve Context Adaptation Bugs (CtxBugs), which occurs when code correct in its original context violates constraints in the target environment. Unlike isolated bugs, CtxBugs cannot be resolved through local fixes and require cross-context reasoning to identify semantic mismatches. Overlooking them may lead to critical failures in adaptation. Although Large Language Models (LLMs) show great potential in automating code-related tasks, their ability to resolve CtxBugs remains a significant and unexplored obstacle to their practical use in code adaptation. To bridge this gap, we propose CtxBugGen, a novel framework for generating CtxBugs to evaluate LLMs. Its core idea is to leverage LLMs' tendency to generate plausible but context-free code when contextual constraints are absent. The framework generates CtxBugs through a four-step process to ensure their relevance and validity: (1) Adaptation Task Selection, (2) Task-specific Perturbation,(3) LLM-based Variant Generation and (4) CtxBugs Identification. Based on the benchmark constructed by CtxBugGen, we conduct an empirical study with four state-of-the-art LLMs. Our results reveal their unsatisfactory performance in CtxBug resolution. The best performing LLM, Kimi-K2, achieves 55.93% on Pass@1 and resolves just 52.47% of CtxBugs. The presence of CtxBugs degrades LLMs' adaptation performance by up to 30%. Failure analysis indicates that LLMs often overlook CtxBugs and replicate them in their outputs. Our study highlights a critical weakness in LLMs' cross-context reasoning and emphasize the need for new methods to enhance their context awareness for reliable code adaptation.

preprint2022arXiv

Is this Change the Answer to that Problem? Correlating Descriptions of Bug and Code Changes for Evaluating Patch Correctness

In this work, we propose a novel perspective to the problem of patch correctness assessment: a correct patch implements changes that "answer" to a problem posed by buggy behaviour. Concretely, we turn the patch correctness assessment into a Question Answering problem. To tackle this problem, our intuition is that natural language processing can provide the necessary representations and models for assessing the semantic correlation between a bug (question) and a patch (answer). Specifically, we consider as inputs the bug reports as well as the natural language description of the generated patches. Our approach, Quatrain, first considers state of the art commit message generation models to produce the relevant inputs associated to each generated patch. Then we leverage a neural network architecture to learn the semantic correlation between bug reports and commit messages. Experiments on a large dataset of 9135 patches generated for three bug datasets (Defects4j, Bugs.jar and Bears) show that Quatrain can achieve an AUC of 0.886 on predicting patch correctness, and recalling 93% correct patches while filtering out 62% incorrect patches. Our experimental results further demonstrate the influence of inputs quality on prediction performance. We further perform experiments to highlight that the model indeed learns the relationship between bug reports and code change descriptions for the prediction. Finally, we compare against prior work and discuss the benefits of our approach.

preprint2020arXiv

On the Efficiency of Test Suite based Program Repair: A Systematic Assessment of 16 Automated Repair Systems for Java Programs

Test-based automated program repair has been a prolific field of research in software engineering in the last decade. Many approaches have indeed been proposed, which leverage test suites as a weak, but affordable, approximation to program specifications. Although the literature regularly sets new records on the number of benchmark bugs that can be fixed, several studies increasingly raise concerns about the limitations and biases of state-of-the-art approaches. For example, the correctness of generated patches has been questioned in a number of studies, while other researchers pointed out that evaluation schemes may be misleading with respect to the processing of fault localization results. Nevertheless, there is little work addressing the efficiency of patch generation, with regard to the practicality of program repair. In this paper, we fill this gap in the literature, by providing an extensive review on the efficiency of test suite based program repair. Our objective is to assess the number of generated patch candidates, since this information is correlated to (1) the strategy to traverse the search space efficiently in order to select sensical repair attempts, (2) the strategy to minimize the test effort for identifying a plausible patch, (3) as well as the strategy to prioritize the generation of a correct patch. To that end, we perform a large-scale empirical study on the efficiency, in terms of quantity of generated patch candidates of the 16 open-source repair tools for Java programs. The experiments are carefully conducted under the same fault localization configurations to limit biases.