SERA: Soft-Verified Efficient Repository Agents
Open accessAbstract
Open-weight coding agents should hold a fundamental advantage over closed-source systems because they can specialize to private codebases, encoding repository-specific information directly in their weights. Yet the cost and complexity of training has kept this advantage theoretical until now. We present Soft-Verified Efficient Repository Agents (SERA), an efficient method for training coding agents that enables the rapid and cheap creation of agents specialized to private codebases. Using Soft Verified Generation (SVG), we generate thousands of trajectories from any code repository, without requiring unit tests. Beyond repository specialization, we apply SVG to a larger corpus of codebases, generating 200,000+ synthetic trajectories. Using only supervised finetuning (SFT), SERA achieves leading results among fully open-source (open data, method, code) models while matching the performance of open-weight models like Devstral-Small-2. Creating SERA models is 26x cheaper than reinforcement learning and 57x cheaper than previous synthetic data methods to reach equivalent performance. We use our dataset to provide detailed analysis of scaling laws, ablations, and confounding factors for training coding agents. Overall, we believe our work will greatly accelerate research on open coding agents and showcase the advantage of open-source models that can adapt to private codebases. We release SERA as the first model in Ai2's Open Coding Agents series, along with all our code, data, and Claude Code integration to support the research community.
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Shen et al. (2026) found a median standard deviation of 1.2% in their experiments with SWE-Bench-Verified.
“Shen et al. (2026) apply the same signal-to-noise ratio to assess the reliability of their agentic training findings, and find a median standard deviation of 1.2% in their experiments with SWE-Bench-Verified .”
From On Randomness in Agentic Evals (2026) · cites this paper as Shen et al. (2026)
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Cites
The publisher hasn’t deposited this paper’s reference list.
Research works printed but not linked: 2
- Golubev, M. Nekrashevich, A. Shevtsov, S. Karasik, A. Andriushchenko, M. Trofimova, D. Litvintseva, and B. Yangel. SWE-rebench: An Automated Pipeline for Task Collection and Decontaminated Evaluation of Software Engineering Agents. ArXiv, abs/2503.00000, 2025. · arXiv
- A. Sonwane, I. White, H. Lee, M. Pereira, L. Caccia, M. Kim, Z. Shi, C. Singh, A. Sordoni, M.-A. Côté, and X. Yuan. Bugpilot: Complex bug generation for efficient learning of swe skills, 2025b. URL https://arxiv.org/abs/2510. 19898.
Cited by
Sorted by citations
On Randomness in Agentic Evals
Bjarnason, B. H., Silva, A., & Monperrus, M. (2026) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2602.07150 · Cited by 1 · see citing works
“Shen et al. (2026) apply the same signal-to-noise ratio to assess the reliability of their agentic training findings, and find a median standard deviation of 1.2% in their experiments with SWE-Bench-Verified .”
Influential
- Authors
- Shen, E., Tormoen, D., Shah, S., Farhadi, A., & Dettmers, T.
- Affiliations
- University of Washington (US)
- Allen Institute for Artificial Intelligence (US)
- Venue
- arXiv
- Publisher
- arXiv
- Published
- 2026
- ISSN
- 2331-8422 (ISSN-L)
- arXiv
- 2601.20789
- OpenAlex
- W7126045895
- Cited by
- 0
- References
- 0
- Type
- posted content
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- arxiv.org
- Licence
- Locations
- arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
- arXiv (Cornell University) (cc-by)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Software Engineering Research
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Topic Modeling
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Software Engineering Techniques and Practices
- Keywords
- coding agents, synthetic data generation, supervised fine-tuning, training cost reduction, scaling laws, open-source models
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
