A System for Automated Unit Test Generation Using Large Language Models and Assessment of Generated Test Suites
August 14, 2024 Β· Declared Dead Β· π International Conference on Software Testing, Verification and Validation Workshops
"No code URL or promise found in abstract"
Evidence collected by the PWNC Scanner
Authors
Andrea Lops, Fedelucio Narducci, Azzurra Ragone, Michelantonio Trizio, Claudio Bartolini
arXiv ID
2408.07846
Category
cs.SE: Software Engineering
Cross-listed
cs.AI
Citations
26
Venue
International Conference on Software Testing, Verification and Validation Workshops
Last Checked
4 months ago
Abstract
Unit tests represent the most basic level of testing within the software testing lifecycle and are crucial to ensuring software correctness. Designing and creating unit tests is a costly and labor-intensive process that is ripe for automation. Recently, Large Language Models (LLMs) have been applied to various aspects of software development, including unit test generation. Although several empirical studies evaluating LLMs' capabilities in test code generation exist, they primarily focus on simple scenarios, such as the straightforward generation of unit tests for individual methods. These evaluations often involve independent and small-scale test units, providing a limited view of LLMs' performance in real-world software development scenarios. Moreover, previous studies do not approach the problem at a suitable scale for real-life applications. Generated unit tests are often evaluated via manual integration into the original projects, a process that limits the number of tests executed and reduces overall efficiency. To address these gaps, we have developed an approach for generating and evaluating more real-life complexity test suites. Our approach focuses on class-level test code generation and automates the entire process from test generation to test assessment. In this work, we present AgoneTest: an automated system for generating test suites for Java projects and a comprehensive and principled methodology for evaluating the generated test suites. Starting from a state-of-the-art dataset (i.e., Methods2Test), we built a new dataset for comparing human-written tests with those generated by LLMs. Our key contributions include a scalable automated software system, a new dataset, and a detailed methodology for evaluating test quality.
Community Contributions
Found the code? Know the venue? Think something is wrong? Let us know!
π Similar Papers
In the same crypt β Software Engineering
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
Microservices: yesterday, today, and tomorrow
π
π
The Cartographer
A Survey of Machine Learning for Big Code and Naturalness
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
An Overview on Smart Contracts: Challenges, Advances and Platforms
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
Slither: A Static Analysis Framework For Smart Contracts
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
ContractFuzzer: Fuzzing Smart Contracts for Vulnerability Detection
Died the same way β π» Ghosted
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
Federated Learning: Strategies for Improving Communication Efficiency
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
In-Datacenter Performance Analysis of a Tensor Processing Unit
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
Deep Convolutional Neural Networks for Computer-Aided Detection: CNN Architectures, Dataset Characteristics and Transfer Learning
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted