一句话:分析 18 篇顶会论文,揭示 Agentic AI 软件工程评估缺陷并提出可复现、可解释的评估指南。
随着 Agentic AI 的兴起,研究者日益使用自主智能体解决软件工程(SE)问题,但其底层大语言模型常如黑箱,难以论证相对基线的优越性;同时评估设计描述的信息缺失常导致结果无法复现。本文系统分析了 ICSE 2026、ICSE 2025、FSE 2025、ASE 2025 与 ISSTA 2025 发表的 18 篇相关论文,归纳当前评估实践的主流做法及其局限。作为一篇立场论文,作者提出一套指南与建议,以实现可复现、可解释且有效的 Agentic AI for SE 评估,特别建议研究者公开其 Thought-Action-Result(TAR)轨迹与 LLM 交互数据(或其摘要版本),以便后续研究更有效地分析不同方法的优劣。为证明此类比较的可行性,论文还给出一个概念验证案例研究,展示 TAR 轨迹如何支持跨方法的系统分析。
With the advancement of Agentic AI, researchers are increasingly leveraging autonomous agents to address challenges in software engineering (SE). However, the large language models (LLMs) that underpin these agents often function as black boxes, making it difficult to justify the superiority of Agentic AI approaches over baselines. Furthermore, missing information in the evaluation design description frequently renders the reproduction of results infeasible. To synthesize current evaluation practices for Agentic AI in SE, this study analyzes 18 papers on the topic, published or accepted by ICSE 2026, ICSE 2025, FSE 2025, ASE 2025, and ISSTA 2025. The analysis identifies prevailing approaches and their limitations in evaluating Agentic AI for SE, both in current research and potential future studies. To address these shortcomings, this position paper proposes a set of guidelines and recommendations designed to empower reproducible, explainable, and effective evaluations of Agentic AI in software engineering. In particular, we recommend that Agentic AI researchers make their Thought-Action-Result (TAR) trajectories and LLM interaction data, or summarized versions of these artifacts, publicly accessible. Doing so will enable subsequent studies to more effectively analyze the strengths and weaknesses of different Agentic AI approaches. To demonstrate the feasibility of such comparisons, we present a proof-of-concept case study that illustrates how TAR trajectories can support systematic analysis across approaches.