Using pre-trained language models to resolve textual and semantic merge conflicts (experience paper)
Jialu Zhang, Todd Mytkowicz, Mike Kaufman, Ruzica Piskac, Shuvendu K. Lahiri
Abstract
Program merging is standard practice when developers integrate their individual changes to a common code base. When the merge algorithm fails, this is called a merge conflict. The conflict either manifests as a textual merge conflict where the merge fails to produce code, or as a semantic merge conflict where the merged code results in compiler errors or broken tests. Resolving these conflicts for large code projects is expensive because it requires developers to manually identify the sources of conflicts and correct them. In this paper, we explore the feasibility of automatically repairing merge conflicts (both textual and semantic) using k-shot learning with pre-trained large neural language models (LM) such as GPT-3. One of the challenges in leveraging such language models is fitting the examples and the queries within a small prompt (2048 tokens). We evaluate LMs and k-shot learning for both textual and semantic merge conflicts for Microsoft Edge. Our results are mixed: on one-hand, LMs provide the state-of-the-art (SOTA) performance on semantic merge conflict resolution for Edge compared to earlier symbolic approaches; on the other hand, LMs do not yet obviate the benefits of special purpose domain-specific languages (DSL) for restricted patterns for program synthesis. CCS CONCEPTS • Software and its engineering → Software configuration management and version control systems.
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.
Cited by top-tier papers8
- Automatic Root Cause Analysis via Large Language Models for Cloud IncidentsYinfang Chen, Huaibing Xie, Minghua Ma, Yu Kang et al.EuroSys 2024 · 175 citations
- PyDex: Repairing Bugs in Introductory Python Assignments using LLMsJialu Zhang, José Pablo Cambronero, Sumit Gulwani, Vu Le et al.OOPSLA 2024 · 38 citations
- Automated Feedback Generation for Competition-Level CodeJialu Zhang, De Li, John Charles Kolesar, Hanyuan Shi et al.ASE 2022 · 16 citations
- Can GPT-4 Replicate Empirical Software Engineering Research?Jenny T. Liang, Carmen Badea, Christian Bird, Robert DeLine et al.FSE 2024 · 15 citations
- UTFix: Change Aware Unit Test Repairing using LLMShanto Rahman, Sachit Kuhar, Berk Çirisci, Pranav Garg et al.OOPSLA 2025 · 9 citations
Builds on7
- Language Models are Few-Shot LearnersTom B. Brown, Benjamin Mann, Nick Ryder, Melanie Subbiah et al.NeurIPS 2020 · 64,255 citations
- Finetuned Language Models are Zero-Shot LearnersJason Wei, Maarten Bosma, Vincent Y. Zhao, Kelvin Guu et al.ICLR 2022 · 4,966 citations
- Multitask Prompted Training Enables Zero-Shot Task GeneralizationVictor Sanh, Albert Webson, Colin Raffel, Stephen H. Bach et al.ICLR 2022 · 1,976 citations
- Jigsaw: Large Language Models meet Program SynthesisNaman Jain, Skanda Vaidyanath, Arun Iyer, Nagarajan Natarajan et al.ICSE 2022 · 134 citations
- Multi-modal program inference: a marriage of pre-trained language models and component-based synthesisKia Rahmani, Mohammad Raza, Sumit Gulwani, Vu Le et al.OOPSLA 2021 · 32 citations
Related papers
- Can Program Synthesis be Used to Learn Merge Conflict Resolutions? An Empirical AnalysisRangeet Pan, Vu Le, Nachiappan Nagappan, Sumit Gulwani et al.ICSE 2021 · 19 citations
- Program merge conflict resolution via neural transformersAlexey Svyatkovskiy, Sarah Fakhoury, Negar Ghorbani, Todd Mytkowicz et al.FSE 2022 · 33 citations
- Automated Program Repair in the Era of Large Pre-trained Language ModelsChunqiu Steven Xia, Yuxiang Wei, Lingming ZhangICSE 2023 · 321 citations
- EditFusion: Resolving Code Merge Conflicts via Edit SelectionChangxin Wang, Lei Xu, Rundong Wang, Yiming Ma et al.ASE 2025
- Merge Conflict Resolution: Classification or Generation?Jinhao Dong, Qihao Zhu, Zeyu Sun, Yiling Lou et al.ASE 2023 · 8 citations
