Fine-tuning large language models for code editing has typically relied on mining commits and pull requests. The working hypothesis has been that commit messages describe human intent in natural language, and patches to code describe the changes that implement that intent. However, much of the previously collected data is noisy: commit messages are terse, human-written commits commingle several unrelated edits, and many commits come from simple, rule-based bots. The recent adoption of software engineering agents changes this landscape. Code changes co-authored by humans and agents tend to be more narrowly scoped and focused on clearer goals. Their commit messages, generated by LLMs, articulate intent and rationale in much greater detail. Moreover, when these changes land in public repositories, they are implicitly filtered by humans: maintainers discard low-quality commits to their projects. We present AgentPack, a corpus of 1.3M code edits co-authored by Claude Code, OpenAI Codex, and Cursor Agent across public GitHub projects up to mid-August 2025. We describe the identification and curation pipeline, quantify adoption trends of these agents, and analyze the structural properties of the edits. Finally, we show that models fine-tuned on AgentPack can outperform models trained on prior human-only commit corpora, highlighting the potential of using public data from software engineering agents to train future code-editing models.

Machine learning developers frequently use interactive computational notebooks, such as Jupyter notebooks, to host code for data processing and model training. Jupyter notebooks provide a convenient tool for writing machine learning pipelines and interactively observing outputs, however, maintaining Jupyter notebooks, e.g., to add new features or fix bugs, can be challenging due to the length and complexity of the notebooks. Moreover, there is no existing benchmark related to developer edits on Jupyter notebooks. To address this, we present the first dataset of 48,398 Jupyter notebook edits derived from 20,095 revisions of 792 machine learning repositories on GitHub, and perform the first study of the using LLMs to predict code edits in Jupyter notebooks. Our dataset captures granular details of cell-level and line-level modifications, offering a foundation for understanding real-world maintenance patterns in machine learning workflows. We observed that the edits on Jupyter notebooks are highly localized, with changes averaging only 166 lines of code in repositories. While larger models outperform smaller counterparts in code editing, all models have low accuracy on our dataset even after finetuning, demonstrating the complexity of real-world machine learning maintenance tasks. Our findings emphasize the critical role of contextual information in improving model performance and point toward promising avenues for advancing large language models' capabilities in engineering machine learning code.

Language models have been applied to various software development tasks, but the performance varies according to the scale of the models. Large Language Models (LLMs) outperform Small Language Models (SLMs) in complex tasks like repository-level issue resolving, but raise concerns about privacy and cost. In contrast, SLMs are more accessible but under-perform in complex tasks. In this paper, we introduce ReSAT (Repository Structure-Aware Training), construct training data based on a large number of issues and corresponding pull requests from open-source communities to enhance the model's understanding of repository structure and issue resolving ability. We construct two types of training data: (1) localization training data, a multi-level progressive localization data to improve code understanding and localization capability; (2) code edit training data, which improves context-based code editing capability. The evaluation results on SWE-Bench-verified and RepoQA demonstrate that ReSAT effectively enhances SLMs' issue-resolving and repository-level long-context understanding capabilities.

Contemporary LLMs pretrained on code are capable of succeeding at a wide variety of programming tasks. However, their performance is very sensitive to syntactic features, such as the names of variables and types, the structure of code, and presence of type hints. We contribute an inference-time technique to make CodeLLMs more robust to syntactic distractors that are semantically irrelevant. Our methodology relies on activation steering, which involves editing internal model activations to steer the model towards the correct prediction. We contribute a novel way to construct steering vectors by taking inspiration from mutation testing, which constructs minimal semantics-breaking code edits. In contrast, we construct steering vectors from semantics-preserving code edits. We apply our approach to the task of type prediction for the gradually typed languages Python and TypeScript. This approach corrects up to 90% of type mispredictions. Finally, we show that steering vectors calculated from Python activations reliably correct type mispredictions in TypeScript, and vice versa. This result suggests that LLMs may be learning to transfer knowledge of types across programming languages.

Developers expend a significant amount of time in editing code for a variety of reasons such as bug fixing or adding new features. Designing effective methods to predict code edits has been an active yet challenging area of research due to the diversity of code edits and the difficulty of capturing the developer intent. In this work, we address these challenges by endowing pre-trained large language models (LLMs) of code with the knowledge of prior, relevant edits. The generative capability of the LLMs helps address the diversity in code changes and conditioning code generation on prior edits helps capture the latent developer intent. We evaluate two well-known LLMs, Codex and CodeT5, in zero-shot and fine-tuning settings respectively. In our experiments with two datasets, the knowledge of prior edits boosts the performance of the LLMs significantly and enables them to generate 29% and 54% more correctly edited code in top-1 suggestions relative to the current state-of-the-art symbolic and neural approaches, respectively.