DISTINCT: A Description-Guided Branch-Consistency Analysis Framework for Non-Regressive Test Case Generation
June 09, 2025 Β· Declared Dead Β· + Add venue
"No code URL or promise found in abstract"
Evidence collected by the PWNC Scanner
Authors
Pengyu Xue, Yuxiang Zhang, Zhen Yang, Xiaoxue Ren, Xiang Li, Pengfei Hu, Linhao Wu, Kainan Li
arXiv ID
2506.07486
Category
cs.SE: Software Engineering
Citations
0
Last Checked
5 months ago
Abstract
Automated test-generation research overwhelmingly assumes the correctness of focal methods, yet practitioners routinely face non-regression scenarios where the focal method may be defective. A baseline evaluation of EVOSUITE and two leading Large Language Model (LLM)-based generators, namely CHATTESTER and CHATUNITEST, on defective focal methods reveals that, despite achieving up to 83% branch coverage, none of the generated tests expose defects, due to a lack of awareness of developer intent. To resolve this problem, we first construct two new benchmarks, namely Defects4J-Desc and QuixBugs-Desc, for experiments, where each focal method is equipped with an additional Natural Language Description (NLD) to support code functionality understanding. Subsequently, we propose DISTINCT, a description-guided branch-consistency analysis framework that transforms LLMs into fault-aware test generators. DISTINCT carries three iterative components: (1) a Generator that derives initial tests based on the NLDs and the focal method, (2) a Validator that iteratively fixes uncompilable tests using compiler diagnostics, and (3) an Analyzer that iteratively aligns test behavior with NLD semantics via branch-level analysis. Extensive experiments confirm the effectiveness of our approach. Compared to state-of-the-art approaches, DISTINCT achieves an average improvement of 14.64% in Compilation Success Rate (CSR), 6.66% in Passing Rate (PR), and particularly 95.22% in Defect Detection Rate (DDR) across both benchmarks. In terms of code coverage, DISTINCT improves Statement Coverage (SC) by an average of 3.77% and Branch Coverage (BC) by 5.36%. These results set a new baseline for non-regressive test generation and highlight how description-driven reasoning enables LLMs to move beyond coverage chasing toward effective defect detection.
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