LLM-based vs. Search-based Merge Conflict Resolution: An Empirical Study of Competing Paradigms
Heleno de Souza Campos Junior, Leonardo Gresta Paulino Murta

TL;DR
This empirical study compares LLM-based and Search-Based approaches for resolving software merge conflicts, revealing their respective strengths, weaknesses, and potential for hybrid solutions.
Contribution
First comprehensive empirical comparison of LLM and SBSE paradigms in real-world merge conflict resolution scenarios.
Findings
LLM excels with imbalanced content but struggles with non-English and large inputs.
SBSE shows better generalization and performs well on balanced conflicts.
Neither approach is universally superior; hybrid methods are promising.
Abstract
Context: The resolution of software merge conflicts is being reshaped by two competing paradigms: generative approaches based on Large Language Models (LLMs) and optimization approaches from Search-Based Software Engineering (SBSE). While tools from both paradigms have shown promise, their relative strengths, weaknesses, and trade-offs are not yet well understood. Objective: This paper presents the first in-depth empirical study directly comparing these paradigms to identify their capabilities and limitations in real-world scenarios. Method: We evaluated MergeGen, a state-of-the-art LLM-based tool, against SBCR, a novel SBSE approach employing a Random Restart Hill Climbing (RRHC) algorithm. The comparison used thousands of real-world conflicts from open-source projects written in Java, C#, JavaScript, and TypeScript. Results: Our findings reveal fundamental trade-offs. The LLM…
Peer Reviews
No public reviews on file for this paper yet. If you reviewed it on a platform where reviews are public (OpenReview, ICLR, NeurIPS, ICML), you can paste yours below so the community can read it here.
Videos
No videos yet. Explain this paper in a talk, walkthrough, or lecture? Add one.
