Proponents of vibe coding argue LLMs democratize software development, allowing anyone to make their own apps. My neighbor used to work as a veterinary tech. She vibe coded an app to make tracking her senior cat's insulin shots easier. On the other side, critics argue vibe coding is producing vulnerable software. Extensive use can also make a codebase more difficult to maintain, since there's a good chance a vibe coder doesn't know enough about coding to fix an error if an LLM can't address it for them.

Welcome to our latest roundup of what's going on in the indie game space. It's Gamescom week, so there have been tons of game announcements. We'll dig into several of those as well as a few new games you can jump into this weekend. You may recall a long-running saga about a guy who tried to gain access to a landfill site because he was convinced it contained a hard drive he accidentally threw away in 2013. The hard drive is said to house a private key for 8,000 Bitcoin, which is worth hundreds of millions of dollars.

The ultimate goal of code agents is to solve complex tasks autonomously. Although large language models (LLMs) have made substantial progress in code generation, real-world tasks typically demand full-fledged code repositories rather than simple scripts. Building such repositories from scratch remains a major challenge. Fortunately, GitHub hosts a vast, evolving collection of open-source repositories, which developers frequently reuse as modular components for complex tasks. Yet, existing frameworks like OpenHands and SWE-Agent still struggle to effectively leverage these valuable resources.

Developing high-performance software is a complex task that requires specialized expertise. We introduce GSO, a benchmark for evaluating language models' capabilities in developing high-performance software. We develop an automated pipeline that generates and executes performance tests to analyze repository commit histories to identify 102challenging optimization tasks across 10codebases, spanning diverse domains and programming languages. An agent is provided with a codebase and performance test as a precise specification, and tasked to improve the runtime efficiency, which is measured against the expert developer optimization. Our quantitative evaluation reveals that leading SWE-Agents struggle significantly, achieving less than 5% success rate, with limited improvements even with inference-time scaling. Our qualitative analysis identifies key failure modes, including difficulties with low-level languages, practicing lazy optimization strategies, and challenges in accurately localizing bottlenecks. We release the code and artifacts of our benchmark along with agent trajectories to enable future research.

Despite recent progress in Language Models (LMs) for software engineering, collecting training data remains a significant pain point. Existing datasets are small, with at most 1,000s of training instances from 11 or fewer GitHub repositories. The procedures to curate such datasets are often complex, necessitating hundreds of hours of human labor; companion execution environments also take up several terabytes of storage, severely limiting their scalability and usability. To address this pain point, we introduce SWE-smith, a novel pipeline for generating software engineering training data at scale. Given any Python codebase, SWE-smith constructs a corresponding execution environment, then automatically synthesizes 100s to 1,000s of task instances that break existing test(s) in the codebase. Using SWE-smith, we create a dataset of 50k instances sourced from 128 GitHub repositories, an order of magnitude larger than all previous works. We train SWE-agent-LM-32B, achieving 40.2% Pass@1 resolve rate on the SWE-bench Verified benchmark, state of the art among open source models. We open source SWE-smith (collection procedure, task instances, trajectories, models) to lower the barrier of entry for research in LM systems for automated software engineering. All assets are available at https://swesmith.com.

The powerful reasoning capabilities of Large Language Models (LLMs) in mathematics and coding, combined with their ability to automate complex tasks through agentic frameworks, present unprecedented opportunities for accelerating scientific innovation. In this paper, we introduce AI-Researcher, a fully autonomous research system that transforms how AI-driven scientific discovery is conducted and evaluated.

Programming assistants powered by large language models have transformed software development, yet most benchmarks focus narrowly on code generation tasks. Recent efforts like InfiBench and StackEval attempt to address this gap using Stack Overflow data but remain limited to single-turn interactions in isolated contexts, require significant manual curation, and fail to represent complete project environments. We introduce CodeAssistBench (CAB), the first benchmark framework for evaluating multi-turn programming assistance in realistic settings that address questions grounded in actual codebases. Unlike existing programming Q&A benchmarks, CAB automatically generates scalable datasets from GitHub issues tagged with questions using configurable parameters (e.g., repository creation date, star count, programming languages), and includes automatic containerization of codebases for evaluation. It then evaluates models through simulated users in these containerized environments with full codebase access. Using this framework, we constructed a test set of 3,286 real-world programming questions across 214 repositories, spanning seven programming languages and diverse problem domains. Our evaluation of leading LLMs reveals a substantial capability gap: while models perform well on Stack Overflow questions with success rates of 70-83%, they resolve only up to 16.49% of CAB's issues from recent repositories (post-training cutoff). This discrepancy highlights the challenges of providing assistance in complex, project-specific contexts versus answering standalone questions.

Requests for name changes in the electronic proceedings will be accepted with no questions asked. However name changes may cause bibliographic tracking issues. Authors are asked to consider this carefully and discuss it with their co-authors prior to requesting a name change in the electronic proceedings. Use the Report an Issue link to request a name change.

LLM based agents have demonstrated great potential in generating and managing code within complex codebases. In this paper, we introduce WebGen-Bench, a novel benchmark designed to measure an LLM-based agent's ability to create multi-file website codebases from scratch. It contains diverse instructions for website generation, created through the combined efforts of human annotators and GPT-4o. These instructions span three major categories and thirteen minor categories, encompassing nearly all important types of web applications.To assess the quality of the generated websites, we generate test cases targeting each functionality described in the instructions. These test cases are then manually filtered, refined, and organized to ensure accuracy, resulting in a total of 647 test cases. Each test case specifies an operation to be performed on the website and the expected outcome of the operation.To automate testing and improve reproducibility, we employ a powerful web-navigation agent to execute test cases on the generated websites and determine whether the observed responses align with the expected results.We evaluate three high-performance code-agent frameworks--Bolt.diy,