Weilin Jin

Taiyu Zhu, Yifan Wu, Weilin Jin et al.

LLM-based multi-agent systems exhibit remarkable collaborative capabilities in complex multi-step tasks. However, these systems are highly sensitive to single-step execution errors that can propagate through agent interactions and lead to cascading failures. To understand the causes of failure and improve system reliability, failure attribution has been introduced as a task that aims to automatically identify the root cause step responsible for a failure. Existing failure attribution methods mainly rely on LLMs to reason over original execution trajectories, which not only incur high inference costs and latency, but also suffer from interference caused by redundant and noisy execution logs, causing LLMs to struggle in accurately identifying the true root cause step. To address this, we propose StepFinder, a lightweight failure attribution framework. We use LLMs solely during the feature construction phase to encode execution logs into temporal semantic sequences. Subsequently, a parameter-efficient combination of temporal modeling and attention modules is applied to capture the sequential evolution and cross-step dependencies of the trajectories. Finally, the step-level error score is refined through multi-scale differences and position bias, enabling precise root cause identification. Experimental results on the Who&When benchmark demonstrate that StepFinder outperforms LLM-based methods in step-level failure attribution while achieving substantially higher inference efficiency, reducing inference time by 79% compared with the fastest LLM-based method, with no text generation overhead. Our code is available at https://github.com/taiyu-zhu/StepFinder.

Chenyu Zhao, Shenglin Zhang, Zeshun Huang et al.

Large language models (LLMs) have shown growing potential in software engineering, yet few benchmarks evaluate their ability to repair software during migration across instruction set architectures (ISAs). Cross-ISA migration, such as between x86_64 and aarch64, requires handling complex dependencies, heterogeneous toolchains, and long build logs while ensuring executable verification. To address this challenge, we present Build-bench, an end-to-end benchmark that systematically evaluates the capability of LLMs to repair build failures in cross-ISA settings. Build-bench collects 268 real-world failed packages and integrates auxiliary tools including Structure Extraction, File Content Extraction, Content Modification, and Build Verification to support autonomous, tool-augmented reasoning. The repair process operates in an iterative loop where, upon failure, the model receives updated build logs and previous repair outcomes to refine subsequent attempts. Through a comparative evaluation across the studied models, Build-bench reveals that current models achieve a maximum build success rate of 63.19% and tool usage patterns differ significantly across models. By coupling real build environments with verifiable outcomes, Build-bench establishes the first architecture-aware benchmark for studying LLM-based software build and repair.