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.

The issue-resolving task, where a model generates patches to fix real-world bugs, has emerged as a key benchmark for evaluating the capabilities of large language models (LLMs). While SWE-bench has become the dominant benchmark in this domain, it suffers from several limitations: it has not been updated since its release, is restricted to only 12 repositories, and relies heavily on manual effort for constructing test instances and setting up executable environments, significantly limiting its scalability. We present SWE-bench-Live3, a live-updatable benchmark designed to address these limitations. SWE-bench-Live currently includes 1,890 tasks derived from real GitHub issues created since 2024, spanning 223 repositories. Each task is accompanied by a dedicated Docker image to ensure reproducible execution. Additionally, we introduce an automated curation pipeline that streamlines the entire process from instance creation to environment setup, removing manual bottlenecks and enabling scalability and continuous updates. We evaluate a range of state-of-the-art models and agent frameworks on SWE-bench-Live, offering detailed empirical insights into their real-world bug-fixing capabilities. By providing a fresh, diverse, and executable benchmark grounded in live repository activity, SWE-bench-Live supports reliable, large-scale assessment of code LLMs and code agents in realistic development settings.

Public model repositories now contain millions of models, yet most remain undocumented and effectively lost: their capabilities, provenance, and constraints cannot be reliably determined. As a result, the field wastes training time and compute, propagates hidden biases, faces intellectual-property risks, and misses opportunities for model reuse and transfer. In this position paper, we advocate charting the world's model population in a unified structure we call the Model Atlas: a graph that captures models, their attributes, and the weight transformations connecting them. The Model Atlas enables applications in model forensics, meta-ML research, and model discovery, challenging tasks given today's unstructured model repositories. However, because most models lack documentation, large atlas regions remain uncharted. Addressing this gap motivates new machine learning methods that treat models themselves as data and infer properties such as functionality, performance, and lineage directly from their weights. We argue that a scalable path forward is to bypass the unique parameter symmetries that plague model weights. Charting all the world's models will require a community effort, and we hope its broad utility will rally researchers toward this goal.

Programming assistants powered by large language models have improved dramatically, yet existing benchmarks still evaluate them in narrow code-generation settings. Recent efforts such as InfiBench and StackEval rely on Stack Overflow questions and remain limited to single-turn interactions, manually curated data, and isolated snippets rather than full project environments. We introduce CodeAssistBench (CAB), the first benchmark for evaluating multi-turn, project-grounded programming assistance at scale. CAB automatically constructs datasets from GitHub issues tagged as questions, using an LLM-driven pipeline that filters noise, extracts runnable contexts, builds executable containers, and verifies environment correctness. This enables continuous, automated expansion across diverse repositories without manual intervention. Using CAB, we create a testbed of 3,286 real-world issues across 214 repositories, spanning seven languages. Evaluating state-of-theart models reveals a substantial gap: while models achieve 70-83% accuracy on Stack Overflow-style questions, they solve only 7.22-16.49% of CAB issues from post-training-cutoff repositories. These results highlight a fundamental challenge: current LLMs struggle to provide assistance in realistic, project-specific contexts despite strong performance on traditional Q&A benchmarks. CAB provides a scalable, reproducible framework for advancing research in multi-turn, codebasegrounded programming agents.

Rigorous security-focused evaluation of large language model (LLM) agents is imperative for establishing trust in their safe deployment throughout the software development lifecycle. However, existing benchmarks largely rely on synthetic challenges or simplified vulnerability datasets that fail to capture the complexity and ambiguity encountered by security engineers in practice. We introduce SEC-bench, the first fully automated benchmarking framework for evaluating LLM agents on authentic security engineering tasks. SEC-bench employs a novel multi-agent scaffold that automatically constructs code repositories with harnesses, reproduces vulnerabilities in isolated environments, and generates gold patches for reliable evaluation. Our framework automatically creates high-quality software vulnerability datasets with reproducible artifacts at a cost of only $0.87 per instance. Using SEC-bench, we implement two critical software security tasks to rigorously evaluate LLM agents' capabilities: proof-of-concept (PoC) generation and vulnerability patching. A comprehensive evaluation of state-of-the-art LLM code agents reveals significant performance gaps, achieving at most 18.0% success in PoC generation and 34.0% in vulnerability patching on our complete dataset. These results highlight the crucial steps needed toward developing LLM agents that are more practical, intelligent, and autonomous for security engineering.

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.

Large language models (LLMs) are powerful tools capable of handling diverse tasks. Comparing and selecting appropriate LLMs for specific tasks requires systematic evaluation methods, as models exhibit varying capabilities across different domains. However, finding suitable benchmarks is difficult given the many available options. This complexity not only increases the risk of benchmark misuse and misinterpretation but also demands substantial effort from LLM users, seeking the most suitable benchmarks for their specific needs. To address these issues, we introduce BenchmarkCards, an intuitive and validated documentation framework that standardizes critical benchmark attributes such as objectives, methodologies, data sources, and limitations. Through user studies involving benchmark creators and users, we show that BenchmarkCardscan simplify benchmark selection and enhance transparency, facilitating informed decision-making in evaluating LLMs.

The task of issue resolving aims to modify a codebase to generate a patch that addresses a given issue. However, most existing benchmarks focus almost exclusively on Python, making them insufficient for evaluating Large Language Models (LLMs) across different programming languages. To bridge this gap, we introduce a multilingual issue-resolving benchmark, called Multi-SWE-bench, covering 8 widely used programming languages: Python, Java, TypeScript, JavaScript, Go, Rust, C, and C++. In particular, this benchmark includes a total of 2,132 highquality instances, carefully curated by 68 expert annotators, ensuring a reliable and accurate evaluation of LLMs on the issue-resolving task. Based on humanannotated results, the issues are further classified into three difficulty levels. We evaluate a series of state-of-the-art models on Multi-SWE-bench, utilizing both procedural and agent-based frameworks for issue resolving. Experimental results based on Multi-SWE-bench reveal three key findings: (1) Limited generalization across languages: While existing LLMs perform well on Python issues, their ability to generalize across other languages remains limited; (2) Performance aligned with human-annotated difficulty: LLM-based agents' performance closely aligns with human-assigned difficulty, with resolved rates notably decreasing as issue complexity rises; and (3) Performance drop on cross-file issues: The performance of current methods significantly deteriorates when handling cross-file issues. These findings highlight the limitations of current LLMs and underscore the need for more robust models capable of handling a broader range of programming languages and complex issue scenarios.

Biomedical research data portals are essential resources for scientific inquiry, and interactive exploratory visualizations are an integral component for querying such data repositories. Increasingly, machine learning is being integrated into visualization systems to create natural language interfaces where questions about data can be answered with visualizations, and follow-up questions can build on the previous state. This paper introduces a framework that takes abstract low-level questions about data and a visualization grammar specification that can answer such a question, reifies them with data entities and fields that meet certain constraints, and paraphrases the question language to produce the final collection of realized data-question-visualization triplets. Furthermore, we can link these foundational elements together to construct chains of queries, visualizations, and follow-up queries. We developed an open-source review interface for evaluating the results of these datasets. We applied this framework to five biomedical research data repositories, resulting in DQVis, a dataset of 1.08 million dataquestion-visualization triplets and 11.4 thousand two-step question samples. Five visualization experts provided feedback on the generated dataset through our review interface. We present a summary of their input and publish the full reviews as an additional resource alongside the dataset.