|
|
|
|
|
by sarchertech
2 hours ago
|
|
This is an undergraduate level persuasive essay masquerading as an academic paper. The title implies some novel research or a review of existing research that that clearly shows agents are better at code review than humans but then provides this single paragraph on the review capabilities of agents: > Beyond general software engineering, several strands of
work speak specifically to the capabilities that code review re-
quires. Pornprasit and Tantithamthavorn evaluate LLM-based
automated review in industrial settings and find that agents
detect the same categories of defect that human reviewers
target: correctness errors, security weaknesses, performance
inefficiencies, and style violations [12]. Li et al. demonstrate
that CodeReviewer produces actionable inline comments at
quality that is at least comparable to those of trained human
reviewers on a significant fraction of the evaluation set [11]. |
|