一句话：论证过拟合并非测试套件不足导致的可修复缺陷，而是规约缺失下不可判定性的结构性后果。
本文针对自动程序修复（APR）中长期存在的过拟合问题提出一种不同的视角。通常过拟合被归因于测试套件薄弱或不完整，因而被视为可通过更好的测试或修补手段消除的工程缺陷。作者主张，当完整规约不可获得时，测试套件只能充当部分正确性判定器（partial correctness oracle），于是修复过程中出现的过拟合并非偶然的副作用，而是问题本身不可判定性的必然结果：在仅有部分判据的前提下，任何修复系统都无法保证所选补丁在全规约意义下正确。基于这一重新定位，论文讨论了该视角对 APR 研究与评价的含义，指出过拟合不应被当作可求解的 bug，而应被理解为修复问题的内在边界，并呼吁建立新的研究议程，在此边界内发展量化、解释并最终对过拟合进行推理的方法。全文为立场性论述，未给出实验评估。
Overfitting is one of the most persistent challenges in automated program repair (APR), typically attributed to weak or incomplete test suites. In this paper, we take a different view: overfitting is not just a nuisance but a fundamental consequence of undecidability. When full specifications are unavailable, test suites serve only as partial correctness oracles. As a result, overfitting emerges as a structural outcome rather than an incidental defect. This perspective reframes overfitting not as a solvable bug in APR, but as an inherent boundary of the problem itself. We discuss the implications of this shift and call for a research agenda that works within these limits, developing methods to quantify, explain, and ultimately reason about overfitting as an unavoidable aspect of repair.