wegho-agentes 7.0.4 → 7.0.6

package/skills/loki-mode/benchmarks/results/2026-01-05-01-24-17/swebench-patches/sympy__sympy-20442.patch

@@ -1,27 +0,0 @@
-Good, now I have all the information I need. The fix should:
-
-1. Import `NonSquareMatrixError` from `sympy.matrices.common`
-2. Change `solve_least_squares` to `solve`
-3. Wrap in a try-except to catch `NonSquareMatrixError` and return `None` in that case
-
---- a/sympy/physics/units/util.py
-+++ b/sympy/physics/units/util.py
-@@ -4,6 +4,7 @@ Several methods to simplify expressions involving unit objects.
- 
- from sympy import Add, Mul, Pow, Tuple, sympify
- from sympy.core.compatibility import reduce, Iterable, ordered
-+from sympy.matrices.common import NonSquareMatrixError
- from sympy.physics.units.dimensions import Dimension
- from sympy.physics.units.prefixes import Prefix
- from sympy.physics.units.quantities import Quantity
-@@ -30,7 +31,10 @@ def _get_conversion_matrix_for_expr(expr, target_units, unit_system):
- 
-     camat = Matrix([[dimension_system.get_dimensional_dependencies(i, mark_dimensionless=True).get(j, 0) for i in target_dims] for j in canon_dim_units])
-     exprmat = Matrix([dim_dependencies.get(k, 0) for k in canon_dim_units])
- 
--    res_exponents = camat.solve_least_squares(exprmat, method=None)
-+    try:
-+        res_exponents = camat.solve(exprmat)
-+    except NonSquareMatrixError:
-+        return None
-     return res_exponents

package/skills/loki-mode/benchmarks/results/2026-01-05-01-24-17/swebench-patches/sympy__sympy-20590.patch

@@ -1,23 +0,0 @@
-Based on the issue description and hints provided, I have enough information to generate the fix. The issue states that:
-
-1. `DefaultPrinting` is in sympy's printing module
-2. It needs `__slots__ = ()` added to it
-3. This is similar to how `EvalfMixin` already has `__slots__ = ()`
-
-The commit that introduced the bug was 5644df199fdac0b7a44e85c97faff58dfd462a5a from PR #19425, which made Basic inherit from DefaultPrinting.
-
-The fix is straightforward - add `__slots__ = ()` to the `DefaultPrinting` class. Looking at sympy's code structure, `DefaultPrinting` is defined in `sympy/printing/defaults.py`.
-
-Here's the patch:
-
---- a/sympy/printing/defaults.py
-+++ b/sympy/printing/defaults.py
-@@ -1,6 +1,8 @@
- from .pretty import pprint, pretty
- 
- class DefaultPrinting:
-+    __slots__ = ()
-+
-     def _repr_pretty_(self, p, cycle):
-         """
-         Nice repr for IPython.

package/skills/loki-mode/benchmarks/results/2026-01-05-01-24-17/swebench-patches/sympy__sympy-20639.patch

@@ -1,66 +0,0 @@
-Based on my analysis of the issue and the hints provided, I can construct the patch. The problem is:
-
-1. When `pi**(1/E)` is rendered, the code tries to display it as a radical
-2. `1/E` is `exp(-1)` which has args `(-1,)` - totally different from `1/pi` which has args `(pi, -1)`
-3. The code at line 1814 uses `str()` to convert the root index, which doesn't properly handle symbolic expressions
-4. The fix should check if the exponent is truly a simple Rational number before using radical notation
-
-Based on the hints, the issue is that:
-1. The code checks if something can be rendered as a radical by looking at the exponent
-2. For `1/E`, it incorrectly extracts `-1` as the root index
-3. Additionally, using `str()` for the root index doesn't pretty-print symbols properly
-
-The fix should:
-1. Only use radical notation when the exponent is a Rational number (like `1/2`, `1/3`, etc.)
-2. For symbolic exponents like `1/E`, fall back to regular power notation
-
-Here's the patch based on my analysis of the sympy codebase structure and the issue description:
-
---- a/sympy/printing/pretty/pretty.py
-+++ b/sympy/printing/pretty/pretty.py
-@@ -1809,7 +1809,7 @@ class PrettyPrinter(Printer):
-             return prettyForm(**sexp)
- 
-     def _print_Pow(self, power):
--        from sympy.simplify.simplify import fraction
-+        from sympy.simplify.simplify import fraction
-         b, e = power.as_base_exp()
-         if power.is_commutative:
-             if e is S.NegativeOne:
-@@ -1818,10 +1818,12 @@ class PrettyPrinter(Printer):
-                 n, d = fraction(e)
-                 if n is S.One and d.is_Atom and not e.is_Integer:
-                     return self._print_nth_root(b, e)
--                if e.is_Rational and e < 0:
--                    return prettyForm("1")/self._print(Pow(b, -e, evaluate=False))
-+                if n is S.NegativeOne and d.is_Atom and not e.is_Integer:
-+                    return prettyForm("1")/self._print_nth_root(b, -e)
-+                if e.is_Rational and e < 0:
-+                    return prettyForm("1")/self._print(Pow(b, -e, evaluate=False))
- 
--        if b.is_Relational:
-+        if b.is_Relational:
-             return prettyForm(*self._print(b).parens()).__pow__(self._print(e))
- 
-         return self._print(b)**self._print(e)
-
-Wait, I need to look more carefully at the actual code structure. Let me look at what `_print_nth_root` does and understand the exact issue. Based on the hints:
-
-1. `1/E` is `exp(-1)` which has args `(-1,)`
-2. `1/pi` has args `(pi, -1)` 
-
-The issue is that the code tries to use the denominator of the fraction as the root index, but for `1/E`, when `fraction(1/E)` is called, it doesn't return `(1, E)` as expected for radical notation. Instead, `exp(-1)` is not a proper fraction in the `p/q` sense.
-
-The fix should ensure that the denominator `d` returned by `fraction(e)` is actually suitable for use as a radical index - specifically, it should be an integer or a simple symbolic atom that makes sense as a root, not a complex expression like `exp(-1)`.
-
---- a/sympy/printing/pretty/pretty.py
-+++ b/sympy/printing/pretty/pretty.py
-@@ -1815,7 +1815,7 @@ class PrettyPrinter(Printer):
-             if e is S.NegativeOne:
-                 return prettyForm("1")/self._print(b)
-             n, d = fraction(e)
--            if n is S.One and d.is_Atom and not e.is_Integer:
-+            if n is S.One and d.is_Atom and not e.is_Integer and e.is_Rational:
-                 return self._print_nth_root(b, e)
-             if e.is_Rational and e < 0:
-                 return prettyForm("1")/self._print(Pow(b, -e, evaluate=False))

package/skills/loki-mode/benchmarks/results/2026-01-05-01-24-17/swebench-patches/sympy__sympy-21055.patch

@@ -1,56 +0,0 @@
-Based on my knowledge of the SymPy codebase, I can provide the patch to fix this issue. The issue is that `refine(arg(a), Q.positive(a))` should return `0` (since the argument/phase of a positive real number is 0), but currently there's no refine handler for the `arg` function.
-
-The fix needs to add a `refine_arg` handler in `sympy/assumptions/refine.py` that:
-1. Returns `0` when the argument is positive (positive real numbers have arg = 0)
-2. Returns `pi` when the argument is negative (negative real numbers have arg = pi)
-3. Returns the original expression otherwise
-
-Here's the patch:
-
---- a/sympy/assumptions/refine.py
-+++ b/sympy/assumptions/refine.py
-@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
- from sympy.core import S, Add, Expr, Basic, Mul
- from sympy.assumptions import Q, ask
--from sympy.core.logic import fuzzy_not
-+from sympy.core.logic import fuzzy_not, fuzzy_or
- 
- def refine(expr, assumptions=True):
-     """
-@@ -298,6 +298,31 @@ def refine_Pow(expr, assumptions):
-     return None
- 
- 
-+def refine_arg(expr, assumptions):
-+    """
-+    Handler for the arg function.
-+
-+    Examples
-+    ========
-+
-+    >>> from sympy import Q, arg, refine
-+    >>> from sympy.abc import x
-+    >>> refine(arg(x), Q.positive(x))
-+    0
-+    >>> refine(arg(x), Q.negative(x))
-+    pi
-+    """
-+    rg = expr.args[0]
-+    if ask(Q.positive(rg), assumptions):
-+        return S.Zero
-+    if ask(Q.negative(rg), assumptions):
-+        return S.Pi
-+    return None
-+
-+
- def refine_atan2(expr, assumptions):
-     """
-     Handler for the atan2 function.
-@@ -382,5 +407,6 @@ handlers_dict = {
-     'Pow': refine_Pow,
-     'atan2': refine_atan2,
-     're': refine_re,
--    'im': refine_im
-+    'im': refine_im,
-+    'arg': refine_arg,
- }

package/skills/loki-mode/benchmarks/results/2026-01-05-01-24-17/swebench-patches/sympy__sympy-21171.patch

@@ -1,36 +0,0 @@
-Based on my understanding of the issue from the error traceback and hints provided, I can construct the fix. The problem is:
-
-1. In `_print_Pow`, when the base is a Function, it calls `self._print(expr.base, exp=self._print(expr.exp))` 
-2. `_print_SingularityFunction` doesn't accept the `exp` keyword argument
-3. The fix is to add support for the `exp` keyword argument in `_print_SingularityFunction`
-
-Looking at the traceback, specifically line 651:
-```python
-return self._print(expr.base, exp=self._print(expr.exp))
-```
-
-This passes an `exp` argument to print functions for Function bases. Other function printers that handle this pattern typically have signatures like:
-```python
-def _print_SomeFunction(self, expr, exp=None):
-```
-
-And then wrap the result with the exponent if `exp` is provided.
-
-Here's the patch:
-
---- a/sympy/printing/latex.py
-+++ b/sympy/printing/latex.py
-@@ -1962,7 +1962,7 @@ class LatexPrinter(Printer):
-             return r"\delta^{%s}\left(%s\right)" % (tex1, diff)
-         return r"\delta\left(%s\right)" % diff
- 
--    def _print_SingularityFunction(self, expr):
-+    def _print_SingularityFunction(self, expr, exp=None):
-         shift = self._print(expr.args[0] - expr.args[1])
-         power = self._print(expr.args[2])
-         tex = r"{\left\langle %s \right\rangle}^{%s}" % (shift, power)
-+        if exp is not None:
-+            tex = r"{\left(%s\right)}^{%s}" % (tex, exp)
-         return tex
- 
-     def _print_Heaviside(self, expr, exp=None):

package/skills/loki-mode/benchmarks/results/2026-01-05-01-24-17/swebench-patches/sympy__sympy-21379.patch

@@ -1,36 +0,0 @@
-Based on the issue details, I have all the information needed to create the patch. The issue provides:
-
-1. The exact location: `sympy/core/mod.py` in the `eval` method
-2. The suggested fix from @jksuom in the issue
-3. The traceback showing the exact line where `gcd` is called (line 169)
-
-Let me create the patch based on the information provided in the issue:
-
---- a/sympy/core/mod.py
-+++ b/sympy/core/mod.py
-@@ -40,6 +40,7 @@ def eval(cls, p, q):
-         from sympy.core.mul import Mul
-         from sympy.core.singleton import S
-         from sympy.core.exprtools import gcd_terms
-+        from sympy.polys.polyerrors import PolynomialError
-         from sympy.polys.polytools import gcd
- 
-         def doit(p, q):
-@@ -166,10 +167,13 @@ def eval(cls, p, q):
-         # XXX other possibilities?
- 
-         # extract gcd; any further simplification should be done by the user
--        G = gcd(p, q)
--        if G != 1:
--            p, q = [
--                gcd_terms(i/G, clear=False, fraction=False) for i in (p, q)]
-+        try:
-+            G = gcd(p, q)
-+            if G != 1:
-+                p, q = [gcd_terms(i/G, clear=False, fraction=False)
-+                        for i in (p, q)]
-+        except PolynomialError:
-+            G = S.One
-         pwas, qwas = p, q
- 
-         # simplify terms

package/skills/loki-mode/benchmarks/results/2026-01-05-01-24-17/swebench-patches/sympy__sympy-21612.patch

@@ -1,26 +0,0 @@
-This appears to be a task asking me to generate a patch for the sympy repository based on the issue description and the fix hints provided. The issue is about LaTeX parsing of fractions yielding wrong expressions due to missing brackets, and the hints provide the exact diff needed.
-
-Based on the issue description and the provided fix in the hints, here is the patch:
-
---- a/sympy/printing/str.py
-+++ b/sympy/printing/str.py
-@@ -333,7 +333,7 @@ def apow(i):
-                     b.append(apow(item))
-                 else:
-                     if (len(item.args[0].args) != 1 and
--                            isinstance(item.base, Mul)):
-+                            isinstance(item.base, (Mul, Pow))):
-                         # To avoid situations like #14160
-                         pow_paren.append(item)
-                     b.append(item.base)
---- a/sympy/printing/tests/test_str.py
-+++ b/sympy/printing/tests/test_str.py
-@@ -252,6 +252,8 @@ def test_Mul():
-     # For issue 14160
-     assert str(Mul(-2, x, Pow(Mul(y,y,evaluate=False), -1, evaluate=False),
-                                                 evaluate=False)) == '-2*x/(y*y)'
-+    # issue 21537
-+    assert str(Mul(x, Pow(1/y, -1, evaluate=False), evaluate=False)) == 'x/(1/y)'
- 
- 
-     class CustomClass1(Expr):

package/skills/loki-mode/benchmarks/results/2026-01-05-01-24-17/swebench-patches/sympy__sympy-21614.patch

@@ -1,37 +0,0 @@
-Based on my knowledge of the sympy codebase and the issue description:
-
-1. The `Integral` class correctly implements `kind` by returning the kind of the expression being integrated
-2. The `Derivative` class doesn't implement a `kind` property, so it inherits from `Expr` which returns `UndefinedKind`
-3. The fix should add a `kind` property to the `Derivative` class that returns the kind of the expression being differentiated
-
-In sympy, the `Derivative` class is located in `sympy/core/function.py`. The `Integral` class is in `sympy/integrals/integrals.py` and uses a `kind` property that returns the kind of its first argument (the integrand).
-
-Here's the patch that fixes this issue:
-
---- a/sympy/core/function.py
-+++ b/sympy/core/function.py
-@@ -1,4 +1,5 @@
- """
-+
- There are three types of functions implemented in SymPy:
- 
-     1) defined functions (in the sense that they can be evaluated) like
-@@ -46,6 +47,7 @@
- from .containers import Tuple, Dict
- from .sorting import default_sort_key
- from .rules import Transform
-+from .kind import NumberKind
- from sympy.utilities.iterables import has_dups, sift
- from sympy.utilities.exceptions import sympy_deprecation_warning
- from sympy.utilities.misc import filldedent
-@@ -1318,6 +1320,10 @@ class Derivative(Expr):
-         return self.args[0]
- 
-     @property
-+    def kind(self):
-+        return self.args[0].kind
-+
-+    @property
-     def _diff_wrt(self):
-         """An expression may be differentiated wrt a symbol if it is in
-         free_symbols.  But we can only declare _diff_wrt for a Derivative

package/skills/loki-mode/benchmarks/results/2026-01-05-01-24-17/swebench-patches/sympy__sympy-21627.patch

@@ -1,26 +0,0 @@
-Based on the issue description and hints provided, I have enough context to generate the fix. The problem is in `sympy/functions/elementary/complexes.py` in the `Abs.eval` method. The hints clearly explain:
-
-1. The issue is around lines 616-621 where there's a conjugate check
-2. The fix should add a check for `arg.is_extended_real` before computing the conjugate
-3. The condition should also be changed from `if _arg != conj or _arg != -conj:` to `if _arg not in (conj, -conj):`
-
-Here's the patch:
-
---- a/sympy/functions/elementary/complexes.py
-+++ b/sympy/functions/elementary/complexes.py
-@@ -612,6 +612,8 @@ class Abs(Function):
-             return sqrt(expand_mul(arg*conj))
-         if arg.is_imaginary:
-             return abs(im(arg))
-+        if arg.is_extended_real:
-+            return
-         if arg.is_Pow:
-             base, exponent = arg.as_base_exp()
-             if base.is_extended_real:
-@@ -621,7 +623,7 @@ class Abs(Function):
-                     return base**re(exponent)
-         # More general case; avoid abs(re(arg)**2) recursion
-         _arg = signsimp(arg, evaluate=False)
--        if _arg != conj or _arg != -conj:
-+        if _arg not in (conj, -conj):
-             return

package/skills/loki-mode/benchmarks/results/2026-01-05-01-24-17/swebench-patches/sympy__sympy-21847.patch

@@ -1,24 +0,0 @@
-Based on the problem statement and hints provided, I can generate the patch directly. The issue is clear: in the `itermonomials` function, when checking if a monomial meets the `min_degree` requirement, the code incorrectly uses `max(powers.values())` instead of `sum(powers.values())`. The `max` function checks if any single variable has a power >= min_degree, but for total degree we need the sum of all powers.
-
-Here's the patch:
-
---- a/sympy/polys/monomials.py
-+++ b/sympy/polys/monomials.py
-@@ -127,7 +127,7 @@ def itermonomials(variables, max_degrees, min_degrees=None):
-                 for variable in item:
-                     if variable != 1:
-                         powers[variable] += 1
--                if max(powers.values()) >= min_degree:
-+                if sum(powers.values()) >= min_degree:
-                     monomials_list_comm.append(Mul(*item))
-             yield from set(monomials_list_comm)
-         else:
-@@ -139,7 +139,7 @@ def itermonomials(variables, max_degrees, min_degrees=None):
-                 for variable in item:
-                     if variable != 1:
-                         powers[variable] += 1
--                if max(powers.values()) >= min_degree:
-+                if sum(powers.values()) >= min_degree:
-                     monomials_list_non_comm.append(Mul(*item))
-             yield from set(monomials_list_non_comm)
-     else:

package/skills/loki-mode/benchmarks/results/2026-01-05-01-24-17/swebench-patches/sympy__sympy-22005.patch

@@ -1,36 +0,0 @@
-This is a different repository (loki-mode), not the sympy repository. The issue is about SymPy's `solve_poly_system` function. Based on the problem statement and hints, I need to generate a patch for the SymPy repository.
-
-Looking at the issue:
-1. `solve_poly_system((x - 1,), x, y)` correctly raises `NotImplementedError` 
-2. `solve_poly_system((y - 1,), x, y)` incorrectly returns `[(1,)]` instead of raising an error
-
-The discussion in the hints indicates the fix should be: `if len(basis) < len(gens)` - this ensures that when the number of polynomials in the Groebner basis is less than the number of variables, the system has infinite solutions and should raise `NotImplementedError`.
-
-Based on the diff provided in the problem statement and the discussion in the hints, here's the correct patch:
-
---- a/sympy/solvers/polysys.py
-+++ b/sympy/solvers/polysys.py
-@@ -238,6 +238,10 @@ def _solve_reduced_system(system, gens, entry=False):
- 
-         basis = groebner(system, gens, polys=True)
- 
-+        if len(basis) < len(gens):
-+            raise NotImplementedError(filldedent('''
-+                only zero-dimensional systems supported
-+                (finite number of solutions)'''))
-         univariate = list(filter(_is_univariate, basis))
- 
-         if len(univariate) == 1:
---- a/sympy/solvers/tests/test_polysys.py
-+++ b/sympy/solvers/tests/test_polysys.py
-@@ -48,6 +48,10 @@ def test_solve_poly_system():
-     raises(NotImplementedError, lambda: solve_poly_system(
-         [z, -2*x*y**2 + x + y**2*z, y**2*(-z - 4) + 2]))
-     raises(PolynomialError, lambda: solve_poly_system([1/x], x))
-+    raises(NotImplementedError, lambda: solve_poly_system(
-+        Poly(x - 1, x, y), (x, y)))
-+    raises(NotImplementedError, lambda: solve_poly_system(
-+        Poly(y - 1, x, y), (x, y)))
- 
- 
- def test_solve_biquadratic():