{ "schema_version": 1, "builder_plan": { "scenario": "An agent looks good in demos, but you cannot tell which product tasks it fails.", "change": "Use the study's evaluation idea to inspect a small set of tasks with human-checked answers.", "baseline": "Your current evaluator and a manually reviewed reference set.", "steps": [ "Locate the paper's implementation and check its license, model support, data needs, and hardware requirements. Stop here if you cannot obtain the required artifacts.", "Save a small set of representative product tasks and expected outcomes. Keep evaluation tasks out of any training or tuning, and choose quality and cost limits before running.", "Run the baseline and the proposed change on identical inputs. Keep other settings fixed and repeat paired runs to expose variation.", "Save per-task outputs, failures, timings, and all usage costs. Review regressions before expanding the test." ], "measure": "Agreement with human review, missed failures, false alarms, and evaluation cost per task.", "decision": "Keep the change only if it meets your preselected quality and latency limits and improves the metric you care about after setup and operating costs. Otherwise retain the baseline. This is an exploration plan, not a validated recommendation." }, "builder_review": null, "arxiv_id": "2610.01023", "title": "Groundability, Not Scale Alone: When Weak Reviewers Can Audit Strong Coding Agents", "summary": "The method replaces unaided human or LLM review of agent-generated patches and their long traces with a cascade that grounds reviewer decisions in patch-caused static errors and generated tests validated to fail on the unpatched repository. It costs additional pipeline stages (static analysis, test generation, fail-to-pass validation, a frozen evidence format) and API or GPU inference for the reviewer, with no foundation-model training required. It can fail by over-rejecting correct patches (0.66-0.67 false-rejection rate, concentrated in unresolved cases that reach the reviewer) and by depending on generated checks whose reliability without official tests remains the open bottleneck.", "rationale": "The audit pipeline is feasible on one 24 GB GPU or third-party APIs and directly addresses a production risk in deploying coding agents, but the high residual over-rejection rate and dependence on generated test quality mean it must be validated on the reader's own repositories before adoption.", "technique": "Execution-evidence-grounded weak review of coding-agent patches", "family": "avaliacao_de_agente", "recommendation": "testar", "published": "2026-10-01", "as_of": "2026-10-18", "editorial_status": "indexed", "source_url": "https://arxiv.org/abs/2610.01023", "independent_implementations": 1, "total_implementations": 2, "stars": 14, "citations": 0, "claims": [ { "claim_id": "claim-01", "statement": "The method replaces unaided human or LLM review of agent-generated patches and their long traces with a cascade that grounds reviewer decisions in patch-caused static errors and generated tests validated to fail on the unpatched repository. It costs additional pipeline stages (static analysis, test generation, fail-to-pass validation, a frozen evidence format) and API or GPU inference for the reviewer, with no foundation-model training required. It can fail by over-rejecting correct patches (0.66-0.67 false-rejection rate, concentrated in unresolved cases that reach the reviewer) and by depending on generated checks whose reliability without official tests remains the open bottleneck.", "basis": "inferred", "result": "", "baseline": "", "conditions": "", "source_url": "https://arxiv.org/abs/2610.01023", "source_page": null, "source_excerpt": "" }, { "claim_id": "claim-02", "statement": "With official execution evidence, five of six reviewers improve both defect catch and over-rejection on held-out traces and two classify every trace correctly; the deployment-realistic cascade reaches 0.76-0.80 defect catch at 0.66-0.67 over-rejection with 0.86-0.89 coverage.", "basis": "inferred", "result": "", "baseline": "", "conditions": "", "source_url": "https://arxiv.org/abs/2610.01023", "source_page": null, "source_excerpt": "" } ], "exposure_map": [ { "dimension": "quality", "basis": "not_evaluated", "finding": "", "interpretation": "", "limitation": "", "next_check": "", "source_url": "", "source_page": null, "source_excerpt": "" }, { "dimension": "compute", "basis": "not_evaluated", "finding": "", "interpretation": "", "limitation": "", "next_check": "", "source_url": "", "source_page": null, "source_excerpt": "" }, { "dimension": "latency", "basis": "not_evaluated", "finding": "", "interpretation": "", "limitation": "", "next_check": "", "source_url": "", "source_page": null, "source_excerpt": "" }, { "dimension": "operations", "basis": "not_evaluated", "finding": "", "interpretation": "", "limitation": "", "next_check": "", "source_url": "", "source_page": null, "source_excerpt": "" }, { "dimension": "compatibility", "basis": "not_evaluated", "finding": "", "interpretation": "", "limitation": "", "next_check": "", "source_url": "", "source_page": null, "source_excerpt": "" }, { "dimension": "security", "basis": "not_evaluated", "finding": "", "interpretation": "", "limitation": "", "next_check": "", "source_url": "", "source_page": null, "source_excerpt": "" }, { "dimension": "data_and_training", "basis": "not_evaluated", "finding": "", "interpretation": "", "limitation": "", "next_check": "", "source_url": "", "source_page": null, "source_excerpt": "" }, { "dimension": "reproducibility", "basis": "not_evaluated", "finding": "", "interpretation": "", "limitation": "", "next_check": "", "source_url": "", "source_page": null, "source_excerpt": "" } ], "risks": [], "minimum_test": [], "open_questions": [], "independent_tests": [], "lab_reproductions": [], "report_available": false, "validation_tier": "unknown", "evidence_tier": "unknown", "infrastructure_basis": "unknown", "equations": [], "equations_status": "not_fetched", "core_kind": "", "equations_fetched_at": "", "equations_source_url": "", "equations_source_sha256": "", "exposures_reviewed_at": "", "exposures_source_sha256": "" }