Out of Context: How important is Local Context in Neural Program Repair?
Julian Aron Prenner, Romain Robbes
Abstract
Deep learning source code models have been applied very successfully to the problem of automated program repair. One of the standing issues is the small input window of current models which often cannot fully fit the context code required for a bug fix (e.g., method or class declarations of a project). Instead, input is often restricted to the local context, that is, the lines below and above the bug location. In this work we study the importance of this local context on repair success: how much local context is needed?; is context before or after the bug location more important? how is local context tied to the bug type? To answer these questions we train and evaluate Transformer models in many different local context configurations on three datasets and two programming languages. Our results indicate that overall repair success increases with the size of the local context (albeit not for all bug types) and confirm the common practice that roughly 50-60% of the input window should be used for context leading the bug. Our results are not only relevant for researchers working on Transformer-based APR tools but also for benchmark and dataset creators who must decide what and how much context to include in their datasets. CCS CONCEPTS • Software and its engineering → Software notations and tools; • Computing methodologies → Machine learning.
Ask about this paper
Your agent reads all of it.
Lune indexed this paper to the last equation, along with the top-tier papers that cite it. Ask a question and the answer quotes them.
Your agent calls
Luneget_paper_fulltext
Free to start. No credit card required.
Terminal
Install the CLIlune papers fulltext 11ae68ce-3d55-444e-8af7-aa2797d7b083Cited by top-tier papers4
- The Fact Selection Problem in LLM-Based Program RepairNikhil Parasaram, Huijie Yan, Boyu Yang, Zineb Flahy et al.ICSE 2025 · 11 citations
- Knowledge Matters: Injecting Project and Testing Knowledge into LLM-based Unit Test GenerationAnji Li, Mingwei Liu, Zhenxi Chen, Zheng Pei et al.ICSE 2026 · 2 citations
- Logs In, Patches Out: Automated Vulnerability Repair via Tree-of-Thought LLM AnalysisYoungjoon Kim, Sunguk Shin, Hyoungshick Kim, Jiwon YoonUSENIX Security 2025
- Hierarchical Knowledge Injection for Improving LLM-based Program RepairRamtin Ehsani, Esteban Parra, Sonia Haiduc, Preetha ChatterjeeASE 2025
Builds on13
- CodeT5: Identifier-aware Unified Pre-trained Encoder-Decoder Models for Code Understanding and GenerationYue Wang, Weishi Wang, Shafiq R. Joty, Steven C. H. HoiEMNLP 2021 · 1,224 citations
- Train Short, Test Long: Attention with Linear Biases Enables Input Length ExtrapolationOfir Press, Noah A. Smith, Mike LewisICLR 2022 · 1,168 citations
- CoCoNuT: combining context-aware neural translation models using ensemble for program repairThibaud Lutellier, Hung Viet Pham, Lawrence Pang, Yitong Li et al.ISSTA 2020 · 325 citations
- Automated Program Repair in the Era of Large Pre-trained Language ModelsChunqiu Steven Xia, Yuxiang Wei, Lingming ZhangICSE 2023 · 321 citations
- CURE: Code-Aware Neural Machine Translation for Automatic Program RepairNan Jiang, Thibaud Lutellier, Lin TanICSE 2021 · 267 citations
Related papers
- DLFix: context-based code transformation learning for automated program repairYi Li, Shaohua Wang, Tien N. NguyenICSE 2020 · 201 citations
- Less training, more repairing please: revisiting automated program repair via zero-shot learningChunqiu Steven Xia, Lingming ZhangFSE 2022 · 223 citations
- A Deep Dive into Large Language Models for Automated Bug Localization and RepairSoneya Binta Hossain, Nan Jiang, Qiang Zhou, Xiaopeng Li et al.FSE 2024 · 60 citations
- DEAR: A Novel Deep Learning-based Approach for Automated Program RepairYi Li, Shaohua Wang, Tien N. NguyenICSE 2022 · 91 citations
- Impact of Code Language Models on Automated Program RepairNan Jiang, Kevin Liu, Thibaud Lutellier, Lin TanICSE 2023 · 164 citations
