Poison Valleys: Diagnosing Path-Dependent Failure in LLM Code Repair

Veljko Skarich
10/15/2026
cs.SEcs.AI

No confident code implementation found for this paper. 2 possible matches can be shown below.

Abstract

When code-repair agents fail, final tests reveal that a patch is wrong but not which earlier commitment caused it or which software obligation failed. Poison Valleys traces this path in 1,844 model requests on two synthetic Python cases: PersistQueue adds atomic batch claiming to a disk-backed queue, while Dijkstra adds source-sensitive filtering to shortest-path search. We define plausible but incorrect software mechanisms, place each in a model's hypothesis, implementation plan, or both, and evaluate the generated code with an Oracle and targeted diagnostic coordinates. Moving the misconception from hypothesis to plan increased failure by 32.2% in PersistQueue and 28.9% in Dijkstra after matching the experimental mix. Different misconceptions produced distinct, model-dependent patterns of violated obligations, although several could converge on the same behavior. This creates a measured connection from upstream misconception to code mechanism and failure form. Code, data, and demo: https://poisonvalleys.org.

View on arXivView PDF

Code Implementations

No confident code match yet

We couldn't find an author-owned or strongly-evidenced community implementation for this paper. 2 weaker matches are hidden by default — verify before relying on them.

No code implementations found yet.

Know of an implementation? Let us know in the comments below!

Similar Papers

Cite this paper

@article{skarich2026poison,
  title  = {Poison Valleys: Diagnosing Path-Dependent Failure in LLM Code Repair},
  author = {Veljko Skarich},
  year   = {2026},
  eprint = {2610.21514},
  archivePrefix = {arXiv},
  url    = {http://arxiv.org/abs/2610.21514v1}
}

Add a badge to your README

Shows whether official code is linked for this paper.

Code of Paper badge
[![Code of Paper](https://codeofpaper.com/badge/2610.21514.svg)](https://codeofpaper.com/paper/2610.21514)

Discussion