最新资讯
computerworld.com Box 发布 Architect:用自然语言构建业务流程工作流 the-decoder.com METR 称 Anthropic 或已在 7 月越过自身 AI 加速预警阈值 towardsdatascience.com 用 Ollama 和 Python 构建你的第一个多工具 AI Agent the-decoder.com Thinking Machines 的 Inkling 2 Small 称霸西方开放权重模型 dev.to 为 CI/CD 构建 AI 质量门禁 dev.to Kakao 发布面向 AI Agent 的决策模型 Kanana-2-v-decide computerworld.com Microsoft 对 Copilot Chat 企业用户扩大未公开的使用限制 pub.towardsai.net Google 发布 Gemini 4 Carbon:主打网络安全能力的前沿模型 gradientflow.com METR 研究:AI 正在加速构建 AI 的团队本身 www.infoq.com GitLab 19.5 将 Agentic 开发纳入 DevOps 平台的治理体系 aiacceleratorinstitute.com 研究:AI Agent 的复杂流程编排可能反而是问题所在 pub.towardsai.net MongoDB 推出 Vercel AI SDK 集成:为 AI 应用提供持久记忆
多元动态
登录 注册
智能体 arxiv.org ·

基于LLM的系统支持工业测试失败分析:经验报告

原文 我的收藏

该研究在 Westermo Network Technologies AB 落地工具增强的 LLM 系统,用于夜间测试失败的根因分析(RCA),实现单 agent 与编排式多 agent 两种配置,均可访问测试元数据与日志。探索性工业案例研究使用两个真实失败场景,6 名从业者通过问卷与焦点小组评估报告,并从 120 次重复执行中采集运营指标,覆盖感知正确性、推理质量、修复现实性、清晰度、有用性、信任以及成本、时长和一致性。结果显示两种配置在两个场景中均无一致的感知质量优势;单 agent 生成报告更快、成本更低,是更实用的基线,多 agent 架构的潜在收益仍需在更复杂场景中评估。

AI推荐理由 arXiv 经验报告,来自 Westermo Network Technologies AB 的工业案例:用单 agent 与编排式多 agent 两种配置对夜间测试失败做根因分析(RCA),由 6 名从业者通过问卷和焦点小组评估两个真实失败场景,并采集 120 次重复运行的运营指标(成本、时长、一致性)。核心新信息是:两种配置在两个场景中均未表现出一致的从业者感知质量优势,单 agent 更快、成本更低,是更实用的基线;多 agent 架构的潜在收益需在更复杂场景中进一步验证。局限是仅两个场景、单一企业,结论为探索性,不能外推为通用结论。

72

正文

Computer Science > Software Engineering arXiv:2609.21843 (cs) [Submitted on 18 Sep 2026] Title:Supporting Industrial Test-Failure Analysis with LLM-Based Systems: An Experience Report Authors:Eric Jansson, Per Strandberg, Thomas Sörensen, Eduard Paul Enoiu, Wasif Afzal View a PDF of the paper titled Supporting Industrial Test-Failure Analysis with LLM-Based Systems: An Experience Report, by Eric Jansson and 4 other authors View PDF HTML (experimental) Abstract:This study examines tool-augmented Large Language Model (LLM) systems for supporting Root Cause Analysis (RCA) of nightly test failures at Westermo Network Technologies AB. Nightly test executions produce heterogeneous test data and logs that practitioners currently inspect manually across multiple sources. We implemented an RCA workflow in single-agent and orchestrated multi-agent configurations, both with access to test metadata and logs. An exploratory industrial case study used two real failure scenarios. Six practitioners evaluated the scenario reports through a survey and focus group, and operational measurements were collected from 120 repeated executions. The evaluation covered practitioner-perceived correctness, reasoning quality, fix realism, clarity, usefulness, and trust, as well as cost, duration, and consistency. Neither configuration showed a consistent practitioner-perceived quality advantage across the two scenarios. The single agent system generated reports faster and at lower cost, making it the more practical baseline in this context. The potential benefits of agent architectures require further evaluation in more complex scenarios. Comments: Subjects: Software Engineering (cs.SE) Cite as: arXiv:2609.21843 [cs.SE] (or arXiv:2609.21843v1 [cs.SE] for this version) https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2609.21843 Focus to learn more arXiv-issued DOI via DataCite (pending registration) Submission history From: Per Strandberg [view email] [v1] Fri, 18 Sep 2026 14:39:42 UTC (870 KB) Full-text links: Access Paper: View a PDF of the paper titled Supporting Industrial Test-Failure Analysis with LLM-Based Systems: An Experience Report, by Eric Jansson and 4 other authors View PDF HTML (experimental) TeX Source view license Current browse context: cs.SE new | recent | 2026-09 Change to browse by: cs References & Citations NASA ADS Google Scholar Semantic Scholar export BibTeX citation Loading... BibTeX formatted citation × loading... Data provided by: Bookmark Bibliographic Tools Bibliographic and Citation Tools Bibliographic Explorer Toggle Bibliographic Explorer (What is the Explorer?) Connected Papers Toggle Connected Papers (What is Connected Papers?) Litmaps Toggle Litmaps (What is Litmaps?) scite.ai Toggle scite Smart Citations (What are Smart Citations?) Code, Data, Media Code, Data and Media Associated with this Article alphaXiv Toggle alphaXiv (What is alphaXiv?) Links to Code Toggle CatalyzeX Code Finder for Papers (What is CatalyzeX?) DagsHub Toggle DagsHub (What is DagsHub?) GotitPub Toggle Gotit.pub (What is GotitPub?) Huggingface Toggle Hugging Face (What is Huggingface?) ScienceCast Toggle ScienceCast (What is ScienceCast?) Demos Demos Replicate Toggle Replicate (What is Replicate?) Spaces Toggle Hugging Face Spaces (What is Spaces?) Spaces Toggle TXYZ.AI (What is TXYZ.AI?) Related Papers Recommenders and Search Tools Link to Influence Flower Influence Flower (What are Influence Flowers?) Core recommender toggle CORE Recommender (What is CORE?) Author Venue Institution Topic About arXivLabs arXivLabs: experimental projects with community collaborators arXivLabs is a framework that allows collaborators to develop and share new arXiv features directly on our website. Both individuals and organizations that work with arXivLabs have embraced and accepted our values of openness, community, excellence, and user data privacy. arXiv is committed to these values and only works with partners that adhere to them. Have an idea for a project that will add value for arXiv's community? Learn more about arXivLabs. Which authors of this paper are endorsers? | Disable MathJax (What is MathJax?)

来源报道 · 1 篇 · 以下链接均前往原始媒体

← 返回精选动态 原文

更多内容