AutoTestForge: A Multidimensional Automated Testing Framework for Natural Language Processing Models

March 07, 2025 Β· Declared Dead Β· πŸ› ACM Transactions on Software Engineering and Methodology

πŸ‘» CAUSE OF DEATH: Ghosted
No code link whatsoever

"No code URL or promise found in abstract"

Evidence collected by the PWNC Scanner

Authors Hengrui Xing, Cong Tian, Liang Zhao, Zhi Ma, WenSheng Wang, Nan Zhang, Chao Huang, Zhenhua Duan arXiv ID 2503.05102 Category cs.SE: Software Engineering Cross-listed cs.CL, cs.CR Citations 0 Venue ACM Transactions on Software Engineering and Methodology Last Checked 5 months ago
Abstract
In recent years, the application of behavioral testing in Natural Language Processing (NLP) model evaluation has experienced a remarkable and substantial growth. However, the existing methods continue to be restricted by the requirements for manual labor and the limited scope of capability assessment. To address these limitations, we introduce AutoTestForge, an automated and multidimensional testing framework for NLP models in this paper. Within AutoTestForge, through the utilization of Large Language Models (LLMs) to automatically generate test templates and instantiate them, manual involvement is significantly reduced. Additionally, a mechanism for the validation of test case labels based on differential testing is implemented which makes use of a multi-model voting system to guarantee the quality of test cases. The framework also extends the test suite across three dimensions, taxonomy, fairness, and robustness, offering a comprehensive evaluation of the capabilities of NLP models. This expansion enables a more in-depth and thorough assessment of the models, providing valuable insights into their strengths and weaknesses. A comprehensive evaluation across sentiment analysis (SA) and semantic textual similarity (STS) tasks demonstrates that AutoTestForge consistently outperforms existing datasets and testing tools, achieving higher error detection rates (an average of $30.89\%$ for SA and $34.58\%$ for STS). Moreover, different generation strategies exhibit stable effectiveness, with error detection rates ranging from $29.03\% - 36.82\%$.
Community shame:
Not yet rated
Community Contributions

Found the code? Know the venue? Think something is wrong? Let us know!

πŸ“œ Similar Papers

In the same crypt β€” Software Engineering

Died the same way β€” πŸ‘» Ghosted