HackerTrans
トップ新着トレンドコメント過去質問紹介求人

nielstron

no profile record

投稿

Coding Agents Are "Fixing" Correct Code

sri.inf.ethz.ch
3 ポイント·投稿者 nielstron·4 か月前·1 コメント

Transcribe your aunts post cards with Gemini 3 Pro

leserli.ch
1 ポイント·投稿者 nielstron·5 か月前·0 コメント

Debunking the Claims of K2-Think

sri.inf.ethz.ch
6 ポイント·投稿者 nielstron·10 か月前·0 コメント

コメント

nielstron
·5 か月前·議論
Yes that's a great summary and I agree broadly.

Note with different prompt types I refer to different types of meta-prompts to generate the AGENTS.md. All of these are quite useless. Some additional experiments not in the paper showed that other automated approaches are also useless ("memory" creating methods, broadly speaking).
nielstron
·5 か月前·議論
It could... but as pointed out by other the significance is unclear and per-model results have even less samples than the benchmark average. So: maybe :)
nielstron
·5 か月前·議論
Hey thanks for your review, a paper author here.

Regarding the 4% improvement for human written AGENTS.md: this would be huge indeed if it were a _consistent_ improvement. However, for example on Sonnet 4.5, performance _drops_ by over 2%. Qwen3 benefits most and GPT-5.2 improves by 1-2%.

The LLM-generated prompts follow the coding agent recommendations. We also show an ablation over different prompt types, and none have consistently better performance.

But ultimately I agree with your post. In fact we do recommend writing good AGENTS.md, manually and targetedly. This is emphasized for example at the end of our abstract and conclusion.
nielstron
·5 か月前·議論
This is life of an LLM researcher. We literally ran the last experiments only a month ago on what were the latest models back then...
nielstron
·5 か月前·議論
Exactly my thoughts... the model should just auto ingest README and CONTRIBUTING when started.
nielstron
·5 か月前·議論
Hey, paper author here. We did try to get an even sample - we include both SWE-bench repos (which are large, popular and mostly human-written) and a sample of smaller, more recent repositories with existing AGENTS.md (these tend to contain LLM written code of course). Our findings generalize across both these samples. What is arguably missing are small repositories of completely human-written code, but this is quite difficult to obtain nowadays.
nielstron
·5 か月前·議論
Hey, a paper author here :) I agree, if you know well about LLMs it shouldn't be too surprising that autogenerated context files are not helping - yet this is the default recommendation by major AI companies which we wanted to scrutinize.

> Their definition of context excludes prescriptive specs/requirements files.

Can you explain a bit what you mean here? If the context file specifies a desired behavior, we do check whether the LLM follows it, and this seems generally to work (Section 4.3).
nielstron
·10 か月前·議論
Debunking the Claims of K2-Think https://www.sri.inf.ethz.ch/blog/k2think
nielstron
·10 か月前·議論
Debunking the Claims of K2-Think https://www.sri.inf.ethz.ch/blog/k2think