NeuGemeinsam in Echtzeit schreiben Kostenlos · Open Source · AGPL-3.0

Schreiben Sie Forschungsarbeitenmit weniger Routinearbeit.

Oleafly ist ein kostenloser Desktop-Arbeitsbereich zum Schreiben von Papers in LaTeX, Typst und Markdown. Finden Sie Quellen, verwalten Sie Zitationen und sehen Sie, wie Ihr Paper an einem Ort Gestalt annimmt. Holen Sie sich einen KI-Assistenten dazu, um einen Abschnitt zu überarbeiten, eine Abbildung zu erstellen oder einen fehlgeschlagenen Build zu reparieren – mit Änderungen, die Sie prüfen können. Ihr Projekt bleibt in gewöhnlichen Dateien, die Ihnen gehören, und Sie können den Editor mit oder ohne KI nutzen.

Kostenlos herunterladen Dokumentation lesen

6We stimulated MCF10A cells expressing the ERK kinase translocation

7reporter~\cite{regot2014ktr} with saturating doses of EGF, HGF or

8IGF-1 and tracked nuclear and cytoplasmic signal every two minutes in 2,184 cellsDaniel Hart

9for four hours. All three ligands produced the same first spike

10within ten minutes (Figure~\ref{fig:overview}b). After that the responses

11diverged: EGF drove pulses about every 19 minutes, HGF about every 41Sofia Marín,

12and IGF-1 rarely more than once an hour (Table~\ref{tab:pulses}).

+2 Neu kompilieren 3 Mitautoren in results.tex

OleaflyTeXFix-Bench: LaTeX Repair Bench…ERK Pulse Frequency Encodes Growth Factor Identity

+2 Kompilieren

Kommentare1

results.tex3

MCF10A cells

Erledigt von Prajwal
1. Elena Petrovavor 2 Stunden
  Sollen wir die Passagenzahl angeben? Reviewer 2 hat beim letzten Mal danach gefragt.
2. Daniel Hartvor 1 Stunde
  Passagen 12 bis 18. Ich trage es unter Methoden ein.
Antwort schreiben. Mit @ erwähnen Sie jemanden.

Antworten
about every 41

Erledigt von Prajwal
1. Sofia Marínjetzt
  Hier steht 41, aber 1,5 Impulse pro Stunde in Tabelle 1 sind alle 40 Minuten. Was stimmt?
2. Prajwaljetzt
Antwort schreiben. Mit @ erwähnen Sie jemanden.

Antworten
Pulses/h

Erledigt von Prajwal
1. Nina Takedavor 20 Minuten
  @Lucas Moreau Median oder Mittelwert?
Antwort schreiben. Mit @ erwähnen Sie jemanden.

Antworten
oncogenic signalling

Erledigt von Prajwal
1. Amara Okaforvor 5 Minuten
  Britische Schreibweise ist für diese Zeitschrift in Ordnung.
Antwort schreiben. Mit @ erwähnen Sie jemanden.

Antworten

methods.tex2

introduction.tex1

main.tex results.tex

QuelltextVisuell

results.texResultsEach ligand pulses at its own frequency

1\section{Results}

2\label{sec:results}

4\subsection{Each ligand pulses at its own frequency}

6We stimulated MCF10A cells expressing the ERK kinase translocation

7reporter~\cite{regot2014ktr} with saturating doses of EGF, HGF or

8IGF-1 and tracked nuclear and cytoplasmic signal every two

9minutesDaniel Hart for four hours. All three ligands produced

10the same first spike within ten minutes

11(Figure~\ref{fig:overview}b). After that the responses diverged:

12EGF drove pulses about every 19 minutes, HGF about every 41Sofia Marín, and

13IGF-1 rarely more than once an hour (Table~\ref{tab:pulses}).

15\begin{center}

16 \begin{minipage}{\columnwidth}

17 \centering\small

18 \captionof{table}{Pulse statistics between 15 and 120 minutes

19 after stimulation. Medians across cells.}

20 \label{tab:pulses}

21 \begin{tabular}{lrrrr}

22 \toprule

23 Ligand & Dose & Pulses/h & Width & Cells \\

24 \midrule

25 \textcolor{egf}{EGF} & 20 & 3.1 & 7.8 & 812 \\

26 \textcolor{hgf}{HGF} & 50 & 1.5 & 8.4 & 694 \\

27 \textcolor{igf}{IGF-1} & 100 & 0.8 & 9.6Nina Takeda & 521 \\

28 Vehicle & -- & 0.2 & 11.2 & 157 \\

29 \bottomrule

30 \end{tabular}

31 \end{minipage}

32\end{center}

34\subsection{Frequency, not amplitude, identifies the ligand}

36Pulse amplitude overlapped almost completely between ligands,

37so we trained a decoder on inter-pulse intervalsAI Assistant alone.

38Given the first two hours of a single cell's trace, it named the

39ligand correctly in 91\,percent of held-out cells, compared with

4047\,percent for a decoder that saw only amplitudes. Mutant RAS

41rescales this code rather than erasing it~\cite{gillies2020ras},

42which suggests the frequency channel survives oncogenic signalling.

44\subsection{Sustained pulsing predicts S-phase entry}

Protokolle 6.4s 80% 1 von 2

ERK pulse frequency encodes growth factor identity
in mammary epithelial cells

Amara Okafor, Daniel Hart, Sofia Marín, Lucas Moreau, Nina Takeda, Elena Petrova

Department of Systems Biology, Northbridge Institute

Figure 1: Growth factors reach ERK through one cascade but leave different temporal signatures. (a) Receptor tyrosine kinases converge on the RAS–RAF–MEK–ERK module. (b) Single-cell ERK activity from the kinase translocation reporter after stimulation at t = 0.

Abstract

Cells read growth factors through a small number of shared kinases, yet they respond to EGF, HGF and IGF-1 with different fates. We imaged ERK activity in 2,184 MCF10A cells with a kinase translocation reporter and found that each ligand produces pulses at a characteristic frequency rather than a characteristic amplitude. Frequency alone identifies the ligand in 91 percent of cells.

1Introduction

Epidermal growth factor, hepatocyte growth factor and insulin-like growth factor all reach the nucleus through the same RAS–RAF–MEK–ERK module [1], yet epithelial cells answer them with migration, scattering or growth. How a single kinase carries that distinction has been a long-standing question. Early work in PC-12 cells tied fate to whether ERK activity was transient or sustained [2, 3].

Live-cell reporters changed the picture. In single cells ERK does not rise and settle; it fires in discrete pulses, and the pulse frequency tracks the growth factor dose [4, 5]. Here we ask whether frequency also encodes which growth factor a cell has seen.

We find that it does. Each ligand sets its own pulse rate, the rate survives changes in dose, and cells that keep pulsing are the ones that go on to divide. The same code is rescaled, not erased, in cells carrying an activating RAS mutation. Blocking the pulses with a MEK inhibitor at 60 minutes stopped division under all three ligands. Section 2 sets out these results, Section 3 discusses what they mean for signalling by timing, and Section 4 gives the imaging and decoding methods.

2Results

2.1Each ligand pulses at its own frequency

We stimulated MCF10A cells expressing the ERK kinase translocation reporter [6] with saturating doses of EGF, HGF or IGF-1 and tracked nuclear and cytoplasmic signal every two minutes in 2,184 cells for four hours. All three ligands produced the same first spike within ten minutes (Figure 1b). After that the responses diverged: EGF drove pulses about every 19 minutes, HGF about every 41, and IGF-1 rarely more than once an hour (Table 1).

Table 1: Pulse statistics between 15 and 120 minutes after stimulation. Medians across cells.

Ligand	Dose	Pulses/h	Width	Cells
EGF	20	3.1	7.8	812
HGF	50	1.5	8.4	694
IGF-1	100	0.8	9.6	521
Vehicle	–	0.2	11.2	157

2.2Frequency, not amplitude, identifies the ligand

Pulse amplitude overlapped almost completely between ligands, so we trained a decoder on inter-pulse intervalsthe gaps between pulses alone. Given the first two hours of a single cell's trace, it named the ligand correctly in 91 percent of held-out cells, compared with 47 percent for a decoder that saw only amplitudes. Shuffling the intervals within each cell removed the signal, and so did pooling cells across doses.

A decoder trained on amplitudes alone did no better than chance for HGF against IGF-1, while interval-based decoding separated all three ligands after the first hour of imaging.

2.3Sustained pulsing predicts S-phase entry

Cells that kept pulsing past the second hour entered S phase within 18 hours in 74 percent of cases, against 21 percent for cells whose pulses stopped early (Figure 2). Pulse count over the first four hours predicted entry better than mean ERK activity over the same window.

3Discussion

Frequency coding lets one kinase carry several messages without crosstalk at the level of amplitude.

Mutant RAS rescales this code rather than erasing it [7], which suggests the frequency channel survives oncogenic signalling and could be read by downstream targets that integrate over time.

4Methods

MCF10A cells were imaged every two minutes for four hours on a widefield microscope with environmental control. Nuclear and cytoplasmic reporter signal was segmented automatically and checked by hand for a random subset of cells.

Lucas Moreau Bearbeiter Bearbeitet sections/methods.tex

Daniel Hart Bearbeiter Bearbeitet sections/results.tex

Nina TakedaBearbeiter · sections/results.texSofia MarínBearbeiter · sections/results.tex

main.tex

QuelltextVisuell

1% TeXFix-Bench technical report, manuscript version 0.2.

2% Compile with: tectonic -X compile main.tex

4\documentclass[journal,10pt]{IEEEtran}

5\usepackage{amsmath,amssymb,booktabs,array,graphicx}

6\usepackage{xcolor,microtype,url,fontspec,newtxsf}

7\usepackage{tikz,pgfplots,balance,hyperref}

8\pgfplotsset{compat=1.18}

9\usetikzlibrary{arrows.meta,positioning,fit,backgrounds}

11\definecolor{accentblue}{HTML}{006D9C}

12\definecolor{accentorange}{HTML}{D55E00}

13\definecolor{accentteal}{HTML}{0F766E}

14\definecolor{slate}{HTML}{64748B}

16\newcommand{\CR}{\textsc{cr}}

17\newcommand{\NEM}{\textsc{nem}}

18\newcommand{\MER}{\textsc{mer}}

20\title{TeXFix-Bench: Engine-Grounded Evaluation of\\

21Single-Fault \LaTeX{} Compilation Repair}

22\author{\textbf{Prajwal~S.~Venkateshmurthy}\\[0.10em]

23\small Independent Researcher\\[0.12em]

24\small San Jose, CA, USA}

26\begin{document}

27\maketitle

29\begin{abstract}

30Compilation repair for \LaTeX{} is easy to score badly. A candidate may

31compile after deleting or hiding content, while exact source equality

32rejects valid alternative repairs. We present TeXFix-Bench, a controlled

33benchmark for repairing complete, broken \LaTeX{} sources under a pinned engine~\cite{tan2024tex}.

34The generator applies 12 deterministic single-fault operators to 13

35hand-authored seed documents. It retains 627 engine-validated rows,

36comprising 300 unique hard-track inputs and 67 unique warning-only

37inputs after hash deduplication.

38\end{abstract}

40\begin{IEEEkeywords}

41automated program repair, \LaTeX{}, benchmark, compilation, large

42language models, reproducibility

43\end{IEEEkeywords}

45\section{Introduction}\label{sec:intro}

46\LaTeX{} compilation failures are a practical target for automated repair.

47A missing delimiter or misspelled control sequence can prevent a complete

48document from building, and the first reported diagnostic may be distant

49from the underlying fault. LLM-assisted writing systems now operate inside

50\LaTeX{} editors~\cite{wen2024overleafcopilot,hou2026paperdebugger}, but their

51publications do not provide a public, engine-pinned evaluation of

52compilation-failure repair.

54Program repair benchmarks pair a defect with an executable oracle and a

55fixed harness~\cite{just2014defects4j,legoues2015manybug}. SWE-bench extends

56the contract to repository-scale issues~\cite{jimenez2024swebench}.

57TeXFix-Bench studies a narrower input-output contract: a system receives

58an existing broken source document and must return a repaired full source

59under a specified engine.

61\section{Benchmark Construction}\label{sec:construction}

62\begin{figure*}[t]

63\centering

64\begin{tikzpicture}[font=\footnotesize\sffamily,node distance=0.58cm,

65 phase/.style={rounded corners=2.5pt,line width=0.7pt,

66 minimum width=2.55cm,minimum height=0.82cm,align=center}]

67\node[source] (seed) {13 known-good\\seed documents};

68\node[transform,right=of seed] (mutate) {12 deterministic\\mutation operators};

69\node[engine,right=of mutate] (gate) {Tectonic 0.17.0\\quality gate};

70\node[artifact,right=of gate] (rows) {627 retained\\rows};

71\draw[flow] (seed) -- (mutate);

72\draw[flow] (mutate) -- (gate);

73\draw[flow] (gate) -- (rows);

74\end{tikzpicture}

75\caption{TeXFix-Bench data and evaluation flow. Construction is

76deterministic. Evaluation reuses saved candidates and reruns only local

77engine and PDF-text checks.}

78\label{fig:pipeline}

79\end{figure*}

81\section{Results}\label{sec:results}

82Table~\ref{tab:main} reports the aggregate outcome.

83Figure~\ref{fig:paired} shows \CR{} and \NEM{} for each system, and

84Figure~\ref{fig:contrasts} shows the published paired contrasts.

86\begin{table*}[t]

87\caption{Version 0.2 results on 86 distinct hard-track inputs. \CR{} is

88intention-to-treat. \MER{} and \NEM{} use the same denominatior.}

89\label{tab:main}

90\input{results/tables/main-results-v02.tex}

91\end{table*}

93Claude Sonnet 5, GPT-5.6 Sol, and Grok 4.5 each recover 85 of 86 inputs.

94Their normalized exact-match counts are 52, 66, and 59, respectively.

96\begin{thebibliography}{19}

97\bibitem{just2014defects4j}

98R. Just, D. Jalali, and M. D. Ernst, \emph{Defects4J: A database of existing

99faults to enable controlled testing studies for Java programs}, ISSTA, 2014.

100\bibitem{legoues2015manybugs}

101C. Le Goues, N. Holtschulte, E. K. Smith, Y. Brun, P. Devanbu, S. Forrest,

102and W. Weimer, \emph{The ManyBugs and IntroClass benchmarks}, TSE, 2015.

103\bibitem{jimenez2024swebench}

104C. E. Jimenez, J. Yang, A. Wettig, S. Yao, K. Pei, O. Press, and

105K. Narasimhan, \emph{SWE-bench}, ICLR, 2024.

106\bibitem{chen2021codex}

107M. Chen et al., \emph{Evaluating large language models trained on code},

108arXiv:2107.03374, 2021.

109\bibitem{smith2015overfitting}

110E. K. Smith, E. T. Barr, C. Le Goues, and Y. Brun, \emph{Is the cure worse

111than the disease? Overfitting in automated program repair}, FSE, 2015.

112\bibitem{demillo1978}

113R. A. DeMillo, R. J. Lipton, and F. G. Sayward, \emph{Hints on test data

114selection}, Computer, 1978.

115\bibitem{jia2011mutation}

116Y. Jia and M. Harman, \emph{An analysis and survey of the development of

117mutation testing}, TSE, 2011.

118\bibitem{gupta2017deepfix}

119R. Gupta, S. Pal, A. Kanade, and S. Shevade, \emph{DeepFix}, AAAI, 2017.

120\bibitem{yasunaga2020drrepair}

121M. Yasunaga and P. Liang, \emph{Graph-based, self-supervised program repair

122from diagnostic feedback}, ICML, 2020.

123\bibitem{zhu2022eqfix}

124F. Zhu, Z. Liu, G. Yang, J. Li, and S. Cheung, \emph{EqFix}, ASE, 2022.

125\bibitem{wang2024texocr}

126K. Wang et al., \emph{TexOCR-Bench: Benchmarking page-image-to-LaTeX

127reconstruction}, 2024.

128\bibitem{wen2024overleafcopilot}

129H. Wen, Z. Zhang, and Y. Li, \emph{OverleafCopilot: Empowering academic

130writing in Overleaf with large language models}, 2024.

131\bibitem{hou2026paperdebugger}

132S. Hou et al., \emph{PaperDebugger: An in-editor assistant for manuscript

133repair}, 2026.

134\bibitem{tan2024tex}

135J. Tan, K. Zhang, and X. Chen, \emph{Instrumenting TeX produced diagnostics

136for repair}, 2024.

137\bibitem{zheng2023judging}

138L. Zheng et al., \emph{Judging LLM-as-a-judge with MT-Bench and Chatbot

139Arena}, NeurIPS, 2023.

140\bibitem{panickssery2024selfpref}

141A. Panickssery, S. R. Bowman, and S. Feng, \emph{LLM evaluators recognize

142and favor their own generations}, NeurIPS, 2024.

143\bibitem{hui2024qwen}

144B. Hui et al., \emph{Qwen2.5-Coder technical report}, 2024.

145\bibitem{metaai2024llama}

146Meta AI, \emph{The Llama 3 herd of models}, 2024.

147\bibitem{kassis2024reproduce}

148E. Kassis et al., \emph{On the reproducibility of research artifacts}, 2024.

149\end{thebibliography}

150

151\end{document}

Protokolle 1.9s 100% 1 von 2

Wird kompiliert 1/3 erledigt

1 aktiv · 1 wartend

SprachanalyseAktuelle Projektfassung analysiert
Wird kompiliertPDF-Ausgabe wird erzeugt und geprüft
PDF wird dargestelltWarten auf eine geprüfte Kompilierausgabe

TeXFix-Bench: Engine-Grounded Evaluation of
Single-Fault LATEX Compilation Repair

Prajwal S. Venkateshmurthy
Independent Researcher
San Jose, CA, USA

Abstract—Compilation repair for LaTeX is easy to score badly. A candidate may compile after deleting or hiding content, while exact source equality rejects valid alternative repairs. We present TeXFix-Bench, a controlled benchmark for repairing complete, broken LaTeX sources under a pinned engine. The generator applies 12 deterministic single-fault operators to 13 hand-authored seed documents. It retains 627 engine-validated rows, comprising 300 unique hard-track inputs and 67 unique warning-only inputs after hash deduplication.

Index Terms—automated program repair, LaTeX, benchmark, compilation, large language models, reproducibility

I. INTRODUCTION

LaTeX compilation failures are a practical target for automated repair. A missing delimiter or misspelled control sequence can prevent a complete document from building, and the first reported diagnostic may be distant from the underlying fault. LLM-assisted writing systems now operate inside LaTeX editors , but their publications do not provide a public, engine-pinned evaluation of compilation-failure repair.

Program repair benchmarks pair a defect with an executable oracle and a fixed harness . TeXFix-Bench studies a narrower contract: a broken source document in, a repaired full source out, under a specified engine.

II. RELATED WORK

TexOCR-Bench evaluates page-image-to-LaTeX reconstruction , and EqFix repairs errors in individual equations by synthesizing rules from examples . Overfitting to a weak oracle is a known hazard .

III. TASK AND SCOPE

A system receives one broken source file and returns one repaired source file. The engine, its version, and the build command are fixed for every attempt.

CR = compile(c) ∧ LCS_tok(T_c, T_r) ≥ 0.80(1)

IV. BENCHMARK CONSTRUCTION

Fig. 1. TeXFix-Bench data and evaluation flow. Construction is deterministic.

Every generated row passes an engine gate before it is retained, and duplicate broken sources are removed by SHA-256 so that no input is scored twice .

V. EVALUATION METHOD

Compile Recovery requires a successful Tectonic 0.17.0 run and at least 0.80 token-level LCS similarity between text extracted from the candidate and reference PDFs. Normalized exact match sits beside it, because compilation alone cannot separate a faithful repair from a deletion .

TABLE I
Version 0.2 results on 86 distinct hard-track inputs. CR is intention-to-treat.

System	CR	CR %	NEM	Fail
Identity	0/86	0.0	0/86	0
Rule	34/86	39.5	28/86	0
Qwen-7B + fb	57/86	66.3	17/86	0
MiniMax M3	75/86	87.2	50/86	2
DeepSeek V4	81/86	94.2	38/86	2
Gemini 3.5	82/86	95.3	26/86	0
Claude S5	85/86	98.8	52/86	0
GPT-5.6 Sol	85/86	98.8	66/86	1
Grok 4.5	85/86	98.8	59/86	0

Fig. 2. Compile Recovery and normalized exact match on the fixed cohort of n = 86 hard-track inputs. Circles denote CR, squares NEM.

VI. RESULTS

Claude Sonnet 5, GPT-5.6 Sol, and Grok 4.5 each recover 85 of 86 inputs, yet their normalized exact-match counts are 52, 66, and 59 . Compilation and edit precision must be reported together.

VII. CONCLUSION

The contribution is an auditable task definition, an executable oracle, a fixed cohort, and a replayable candidate ledger.

REFERENCES

[1]R. Just, D. Jalali, and M. D. Ernst, “Defects4J: A database of existing faults to enable controlled testing studies for Java programs,” in Proc. ISSTA, 2014, pp. 437–440.

[2]C. Le Goues, N. Holtschulte, E. K. Smith, Y. Brun, P. Devanbu, S. Forrest, and W. Weimer, “The ManyBugs and IntroClass benchmarks for automated repair of C programs,” IEEE Trans. Softw. Eng., vol. 41, no. 12, pp. 1236–1256, 2015.

[3]C. E. Jimenez, J. Yang, A. Wettig, S. Yao, K. Pei, O. Press, and K. Narasimhan, “SWE-bench: Can language models resolve real-world GitHub issues?” in Proc. ICLR, 2024.

[4]M. Chen et al., “Evaluating large language models trained on code,” arXiv:2107.03374, 2021.

[5]E. K. Smith, E. T. Barr, C. Le Goues, and Y. Brun, “Is the cure worse than the disease? Overfitting in automated program repair,” in Proc. ESEC/FSE, 2015, pp. 532–543.

[6]R. A. DeMillo, R. J. Lipton, and F. G. Sayward, “Hints on test data selection: Help for the practicing programmer,” Computer, vol. 11, no. 4, pp. 34–41, 1978.

[7]Y. Jia and M. Harman, “An analysis and survey of the development of mutation testing,” IEEE Trans. Softw. Eng., vol. 37, no. 5, pp. 649–678, 2011.

[8]R. Gupta, S. Pal, A. Kanade, and S. Shevade, “DeepFix: Fixing common C language errors by deep learning,” in Proc. AAAI, vol. 31, no. 1, pp. 1345–1351, 2017.

[9]M. Yasunaga and P. Liang, “Graph-based, self-supervised program repair from diagnostic feedback,” in Proc. ICML, PMLR, vol. 119, pp. 10799–10808, 2020.

[10]F. Zhu, Z. Liu, G. Yang, J. Li, and S. Cheung, “EqFix: Fixing LaTeX equation errors by examples,” in SETTA 2022, LNCS 13649, pp. 89–109.

[11]K. Wang et al., “TexOCR-Bench: Benchmarking page-image-to-LaTeX reconstruction,” in Proc. 64th ACL, Vol. 1, 2026.

[12]H. Wen, Z. Zhang, and Y. Li, “OverleafCopilot: Empowering academic writing in Overleaf with large language models,” arXiv:2403.09733, 2024.

[13]S. Hou et al., “PaperDebugger: Assisting scientific writing, review, and editing,” in Companion Proc. ACM Web Conf., 2026.

[14]J. Tan, K. Zhang, and X. Chen, “Inconsistencies in TeX-produced documents,” in Proc. ISSTA, 2024.

[15]L. Zheng et al., “Judging LLM-as-a-judge with MT-Bench and Chatbot Arena,” Adv. Neural Inf. Process. Syst., vol. 36, pp. 46595–46623, 2023.

[16]A. Panickssery, S. R. Bowman, and S. Feng, “LLM evaluators recognize and favor their own generations,” Adv. Neural Inf. Process. Syst., vol. 37, 2024.

[17]B. Hui et al., “Qwen2.5-Coder technical report,” arXiv:2409.12186, 2024.

[18]Meta AI, “Llama 3.2 model card,” 2024.

[19]E. Kassis et al., “Agent skills for reproducible research agents,” arXiv:2609.00065, 2026.

Vergrößern

Verkleinern

An Breite anpassen

An Höhe anpassen

Auf 100 % zurücksetzen

25%

50%

75%

100%

150%

200%

400%

Undefinierte Referenz

bibentry · legoues2015manybug

@article
ibitem{legoues2015manybugs}
main.tex:956

Oleafly AgentCLI-Agent BETA

Verbinden Sie einen KI-Anbieter, um fortzufahren

Nutzen Sie Ihren eigenen API-Schlüssel (OpenAI, Anthropic, Groq und weitere) oder lassen Sie ein Modell lokal mit Ollama laufen. Der Assistent kann Dateien lesen und ändern, Ihr Projekt kompilieren und das PDF prüfen.

Einen Anbieter verbindenEin lokales Modell mit Ollama betreiben

Was möchten Sie heute tun?

Arbeitet an „TeXFix-Bench: LaTeX Repair Bench...“

ForschungSchreibenAbbildungenPrüfenEinreichungKommunikationWerkzeugeIhre Skills

citation-management

Comprehensive citation management for academic research. Search OpenAlex, PubMed, and Google Scholar for papers, extract accurate metadata, validate citations, and generate properly formatted BibTeX entries. This skill should be used when you need to find papers, verify citation information, convert DOIs to BibTeX, or ensure reference accuracy in scientific writing.

exploratory-data-analysis

Perform bounded, local exploratory analysis of explicitly supported scientific files. Use for redacted CSV/TSV/JSON profiles; optional NumPy, HDF5, FASTA/FASTQ, and basic image metadata inspection; missingness/leakage audits; outlier and transformation sensitivity; and rigorous EDA report scaffolds. Other domain formats are reference-only and unknown formats fail closed.

hypothesis-generation

Formulate evidence-bounded scientific questions, candidate hypotheses, rival explanations, causal or associational claims, discriminating predictions, measurements, and preregistration-ready analysis plans. Use when turning observations or preliminary findings into transparent, testable research plans without treating hypotheses as facts.

oleafly-literature-sweep oleafly-research-loop paper-lookup research-lookup oleafly-literature-sweep

NEUESTE CHATS2

Was möchten Sie heute tun?

Arbeitet an „TeXFix-Bench: LaTeX Repair Bench...“

Prüfe die Einleitung auf unbelegte Aussagen. Ändere keine Dateien.

Claude Code

main.tex lesen

references.bib lesen

Der Vergleich des Energieverbrauchs braucht eine stützende Quelle. Ich habe die Aussage in der Einleitung gefunden, aber die zugehörige Zitation behandelt die Erkennungsgenauigkeit. Ihre Dateien sind unverändert.

Die Literatur für dieses Projekt sichten

Arbeitet…

Denkt nach…

10 s nachgedacht

To-dos aktualisieren

3 Dateien erkundet

Datei lesen

Ich prüfe zuerst die vorhandenen Zitationen und suche dann nach Aufsätzen, die die Aussagen tatsächlich stützen.

Arbeitet…

Denkt nach…

Ich brauche Quellen, die zu den tatsächlichen Aussagen des Aufsatzes passen:
- satellitengestützte Branderkennung
- stromsparende Sensornetzwerke
- TinyML und quantisierte Inferenz

Ich behalte nur Ergebnisse mit überprüfbaren DOI-Metadaten.

Literatur suchen

Aufsätze suchen

Kurze Prüfung: Drei Zitierschlüssel lassen sich nicht auflösen, und zwei vorhandene Einträge verweisen auf themenfremde Aufsätze. Ich suche nach besseren Treffern zu Waldbranderkennung, TinyML und stromsparenden Netzwerken.

Arbeitet…

Literatur suchen

Zitation prüfen

Bisher vier solide Treffer: MODIS-Branderkennung, ein im Feld getesteter Detektor auf Basis eines Sensornetzwerks, eine Übersicht zu Energy Harvesting und ein TinyML-Review. Ich prüfe die DOI-Metadaten, bevor ich das Literaturverzeichnis anfasse.

Arbeitet…

Zitation prüfen

To-dos aktualisieren

Die Zitationen sind korrekt. Ich füge references.bib neun geprüfte Einträge hinzu und setze sie dann neben die Aussagen, die sie stützen.

Arbeitet…

Datei schreibenFreigegeben

Das Literaturverzeichnis steht. Als Nächstes ersetze ich die ungelösten Schlüssel in main.tex durch die geprüften Quellen.

Arbeitet…

In Datei ersetzenFreigegeben

Dokument kompilieren

PDF-Seiten prüfen

Fertig. Ich habe neun geprüfte Referenzen hinzugefügt, die drei ungelösten Schlüssel ersetzt und den Aufsatz neu kompiliert. Das zweiseitige PDF hat jetzt ein vollständiges IEEE-Literaturverzeichnis ohne fehlende Zitationen.

Kompiliert und das gerenderte PDF geprüft

SCHRITT 1/6

Plan

Zitationen in main.tex und references.bib erfassen

Literatur nach Aufsätzen zu jeder zitierten Aussage durchsuchen

Prüfen, ob jede vorgeschlagene Zitation echt ist

Geprüfte BibTeX-Einträge zu references.bib hinzufügen

Ungelöste Zitationen in main.tex ersetzen

Neu kompilieren und prüfen, ob alle Zitationen aufgelöst sind

Der Assistent möchte Ihre Dateien ändern

write_filereferences.bibZeile 1

references.biberste Änderung · Z1

1@article{open_science2015,

2 title = {Estimating the Reproducibility of Psychological Science},

1@article{giglio2003,

2 author = {Giglio, Louis and Descloitres, Jacques and Justice, Christopher O.},

3 title = {An Enhanced Contextual Fire Detection Algorithm for {MODIS}},

4 journal = {Remote Sensing of Environment},

5 year = {2003}, doi = {10.1016/S0034-4257(03)00184-6}

6}

Ablehnen Freigeben

Der Assistent möchte Ihre Dateien ändern

replace_in_filemain.texZeile 21

main.texerste Änderung · Z21

54Program repair benchmarks pair a defect with an executable oracle and a

55fixed harness~\cite{just2014defects4j,legoues2015manybug}. SWE-bench extends

55fixed harness~\cite{just2014defects4j,legoues2015manybugs}. SWE-bench extends

56the contract to repository-scale issues~\cite{jimenez2024swebench}.

57TeXFix-Bench studies a narrower contract: a system receives an existing

57TeXFix-Bench studies a narrower contract~\cite{zhu2022eqfix}: a system receives

Ablehnen Freigeben

Claude Code

Starten Sie ein Gespräch oder verbinden Sie erneut, um eine Nachricht zu senden Ein Gespräch mit Claude Code beginnen

Bitten Sie die KI um Hilfe bei Ihrem Dokument…

Um Freigabe bitten Prompts Persona gpt-6.1-sol

Protokolle 4.3s 105% 1von 2

TeXFix-Bench: Engine-Grounded Evaluation of
Single-Fault LATEX Compilation Repair

Prajwal S. Venkateshmurthy
Independent Researcher
San Jose, CA, USA

Index Terms—automated program repair, LaTeX, benchmark, compilation, large language models, reproducibility

I. INTRODUCTION

II. RELATED WORK

TexOCR-Bench evaluates page-image-to-LaTeX reconstruction , and EqFix repairs errors in individual equations by synthesizing rules from examples . Overfitting to a weak oracle is a known hazard .

III. TASK AND SCOPE

A system receives one broken source file and returns one repaired source file. The engine, its version, and the build command are fixed for every attempt.

CR = compile(c) ∧ LCS_tok(T_c, T_r) ≥ 0.80(1)

IV. BENCHMARK CONSTRUCTION

Fig. 1. TeXFix-Bench data and evaluation flow. Construction is deterministic.

Every generated row passes an engine gate before it is retained, and duplicate broken sources are removed by SHA-256 so that no input is scored twice .

V. EVALUATION METHOD

TABLE I
Version 0.2 results on 86 distinct hard-track inputs. CR is intention-to-treat.

System	CR	CR %	NEM	Fail
Identity	0/86	0.0	0/86	0
Rule	34/86	39.5	28/86	0
Qwen-7B + fb	57/86	66.3	17/86	0
MiniMax M3	75/86	87.2	50/86	2
DeepSeek V4	81/86	94.2	38/86	2
Gemini 3.5	82/86	95.3	26/86	0
Claude S5	85/86	98.8	52/86	0
GPT-5.6 Sol	85/86	98.8	66/86	1
Grok 4.5	85/86	98.8	59/86	0