arXiv (All)
open access
TestJack: Should you trust the results in coding benchmarks? Agentic Coding Benchmarks Auditing via Evaluator Evolution
Large language model (LLM) agents are rapidly reshaping software engineering, accompanied by an explosion of new code benchmarks. Yet nearly all existing benchmarks still rely on the same decades-old criterion: a solution is correct if it passes a fixed set of unit tests. Such tests are often insuff
Conceptio Open Archive
Analyze & explore related research in Conceptio
Connect this record directly into your research workflow or AI agent. Explore citations across open repositories, query full text, and export structured proof bundles.
This document is indexed with metadata only: full text is not available in the archive for this record. Open the official source ↗
Related documents
- Breaking, Stale, or Missing? Benchmarking Coding Agents on Project-Level Test Evolution#168382
- An Empirical Study of Harness Design for Coding Agents#1034596
- An Empirical Study of Harness Design for Coding Agents#978409
- SpecGuardBench: Can Coding Agents Construct Reliable Validation Harnesses from Natural Language Specifications?#1341752
- SpecGuardBench: Can Coding Agents Construct Reliable Validation Harnesses from Natural Language Specifications?#1319099
Record · ID 1247546
Retrieved via Conceptio: every document is proof-bundled with source, license, and retrieval metadata.
Retrieved via Conceptio: every document is proof-bundled with source, license, and retrieval metadata.
Bring this data into your agent: Connect via MCP or API · 20 free credits to start · no card required
Read the Docs → · View CLI source on GitHub · Conceptio Open Knowledge Archive
Read the Docs → · View CLI source on GitHub · Conceptio Open Knowledge Archive