ExecRetrieval: Measuring the Functional-Correctness Gap in Code-Embedding Retrieval

Hugging Face Daily Papers Papers

Summary

ExecRetrieval introduces a benchmark to measure the functional-correctness gap in code-embedding retrieval, showing that top retrievers frequently rank buggy near-clone implementations above correct ones.

Embedding-based code retrieval is a core component of coding agents and retrieval-augmented code generation, where retrieving correct code matters more than retrieving lexically similar code. Existing code-retrieval benchmarks do not plant controlled, execution-verified single-edit variants of each query's canonical implementation in the search pool, leaving the question of whether embeddings can functionally discriminate correct from near-clone-but-incorrect code unanswered in a retrieval setting. Resolving this requires a benchmark whose search pool itself contains the relevant counterfactuals -- execution-verified buggy variants near-identical to each canonical -- so that a retriever's rank ordering can be directly tested for functional discrimination rather than topical or identity overlap. We introduce ExecRetrieval, 939 Python tasks each paired with one execution-verified canonical implementation and up to four execution-verified buggy distractors, each generated by a mechanical mutation making a single targeted edit, and evaluate 23 dense embedding configurations plus BM25 under provider-native invocation with paired McNemar tests and query-level bootstrap intervals. With near-clone counterfactuals in the pool, the top hosted system reaches exec@10 = 1.00 but only exec@1 = 0.331; rank-1 misses are paired buggy variants 91.5-99.4% of the time across the four leading systems, and the canonical scores below at least one of its four paired distractors in 67-78% of queries on the leading systems. The full dataset, execution oracle, embedding matrices, environment snapshot, and pairwise statistical tests are released at the URL in Appendix D.
Original Article
View Cached Full Text

Cached at: 09/03/26, 03:51 AM

Paper page - ExecRetrieval: Measuring the Functional-Correctness Gap in Code-Embedding Retrieval

Source: https://huggingface.co/papers/2609.01865

Abstract

ExecRetrieval evaluates whether code embeddings can distinguish correct implementations from near-identical buggy variants, revealing that leading retrievers frequently rank incorrect near-clones above canonical solutions.

Embedding-based code retrievalis a core component of coding agents and retrieval-augmented code generation, where retrieving correct code matters more than retrieving lexically similar code. Existing code-retrieval benchmarks do not plant controlled, execution-verified single-edit variants of each query’s canonical implementation in the search pool, leaving the question of whether embeddings can functionally discriminate correct from near-clone-but-incorrect code unanswered in a retrieval setting. Resolving this requires a benchmark whose search pool itself contains the relevant counterfactuals --execution-verified buggy variantsnear-identical to each canonical -- so that a retriever’s rank ordering can be directly tested for functional discrimination rather than topical or identity overlap. We introduce ExecRetrieval, 939 Python tasks each paired with one execution-verified canonical implementation and up to four execution-verified buggy distractors, each generated by a mechanical mutation making a single targeted edit, and evaluate 23dense embedding configurationsplusBM25under provider-native invocation with pairedMcNemar testsand query-levelbootstrap intervals. With near-clone counterfactuals in the pool, the top hosted system reachesexec@10= 1.00 but onlyexec@1= 0.331; rank-1 misses are paired buggy variants 91.5-99.4% of the time across the four leading systems, and the canonical scores below at least one of its four paired distractors in 67-78% of queries on the leading systems. The full dataset, execution oracle, embedding matrices, environment snapshot, and pairwise statistical tests are released at the URL in Appendix D.

View arXiv pageView PDFProject pageAdd to collection

Get this paper in your agent:

hf papers read 2609\.01865

Don’t have the latest CLI?curl \-LsSf https://hf\.co/cli/install\.sh \| bash

Models citing this paper0

No model linking this paper

Cite arxiv.org/abs/2609.01865 in a model README.md to link it from this page.

Datasets citing this paper0

No dataset linking this paper

Cite arxiv.org/abs/2609.01865 in a dataset README.md to link it from this page.

Spaces citing this paper0

No Space linking this paper

Cite arxiv.org/abs/2609.01865 in a Space README.md to link it from this page.

Collections including this paper0

No Collection including this paper

Add this paper to acollectionto link it from this page.

Similar Articles

Agent Retrieval Bench: Evaluating Repository Context Retrieval for Coding Agents

Hugging Face Daily Papers

Introduces Agent Retrieval Bench, a file-level benchmark evaluating how well coding agents retrieve relevant repository files during the context-acquisition stage. The benchmark includes 427 samples across 25 repositories and evaluates various retrieval methods, finding no single family dominates.