Bayesian control for coding agents
About
Modern coding agents pair LLM generators with various tools, including cheap diagnostics and expensive verifiers. The tool-use decisions are typically governed by orchestrators that often use fixed rules and ignore uncertainty. We formulate orchestration as cost-sensitive sequential hypothesis testing: a Bayesian controller maintains a belief over candidate correctness and dynamically decides whether to gather more evidence, refine the candidate, verify it, or stop. Across six generators and nine coding benchmarks, Bayesian control proves to be most valuable when verification is costly and critics are informative but imperfect. Beyond control, the belief state yields an interpretable correctness score that outperforms token-probability and raw tool-success baselines for uncertainty quantification.
Related benchmarks
| Task | Dataset | Result | Rank | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Function-level synthesis | LCB hard (held-out 25% eval) | Utility Difference (Δπ)7.6 | 13 | |
| Repository-level patch generation | SWE-Bench Lite (held-out 25% eval) | Utility Difference (Δπ)62 | 8 | |
| Uncertainty Quantification | LCB Hard | PRR91.1 | 4 | |
| Uncertainty Quantification | LCB Medium | PRR82 | 4 | |
| Bug Fixing | HumanEvalFix held-out 25% (eval) | Utility Difference (Δπ)5.2 | 3 |