Automated Support for Unit Test Generation: A Tutorial Book Chapter

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2110.13575v1
• Date: Tue, 26 Oct 2021 11:13:40 GMT
• Title: Automated Support for Unit Test Generation: A Tutorial Book Chapter
• Authors: Afonso Fontes, Gregory Gay, Francisco Gomes de Oliveira Neto, Robert Feldt
• Abstract summary: Unit testing is a stage of testing where the smallest segment of code that can be tested in isolation from the rest of the system is tested. Unit tests are typically written as executable code, often in a format provided by a unit testing framework such as pytest for Python. This chapter introduces the concept of search-based unit test generation.
• Score: 21.716667622896193
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: Unit testing is a stage of testing where the smallest segment of code that can be tested in isolation from the rest of the system - often a class - is tested. Unit tests are typically written as executable code, often in a format provided by a unit testing framework such as pytest for Python. Creating unit tests is a time and effort-intensive process with many repetitive, manual elements. To illustrate how AI can support unit testing, this chapter introduces the concept of search-based unit test generation. This technique frames the selection of test input as an optimization problem - we seek a set of test cases that meet some measurable goal of a tester - and unleashes powerful metaheuristic search algorithms to identify the best possible test cases within a restricted timeframe. This chapter introduces two algorithms that can generate pytest-formatted unit tests, tuned towards coverage of source code statements. The chapter concludes by discussing more advanced concepts and gives pointers to further reading for how artificial intelligence can support developers and testers when unit testing software.

Related papers

• CLOVER: A Test Case Generation Benchmark with Coverage, Long-Context, and Verification [71.34070740261072]
  This paper presents a benchmark, CLOVER, to evaluate models' capabilities in generating and completing test cases. The benchmark is containerized for code execution across tasks, and we will release the code, data, and construction methodologies.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-02-12T21:42:56Z)
• Learning to Generate Unit Tests for Automated Debugging [52.63217175637201]
  Unit tests (UTs) play an instrumental role in assessing code correctness as well as providing feedback to a large language model (LLM) We propose UTGen, which teaches LLMs to generate unit test inputs that reveal errors along with their correct expected outputs. We show that UTGen outperforms UT generation baselines by 7.59% based on a metric measuring the presence of both error-revealing UT inputs and correct UT outputs.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-02-03T18:51:43Z)
• ViUniT: Visual Unit Tests for More Robust Visual Programming [104.55763189099125]
  When models answer correctly, they produce incorrect programs 33% of the time. We propose Visual Unit Testing (ViUniT), a framework to improve the reliability of visual programs by automatically generating unit tests.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-12-12T01:36:18Z)
• Commit0: Library Generation from Scratch [77.38414688148006]
  Commit0 is a benchmark that challenges AI agents to write libraries from scratch. Agents are provided with a specification document outlining the library's API as well as a suite of interactive unit tests. Commit0 also offers an interactive environment where models receive static analysis and execution feedback on the code they generate.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-12-02T18:11:30Z)
• ASTER: Natural and Multi-language Unit Test Generation with LLMs [6.259245181881262]
  We describe a generic pipeline that incorporates static analysis to guide LLMs in generating compilable and high-coverage test cases. We conduct an empirical study to assess the quality of the generated tests in terms of code coverage and test naturalness.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-09-04T21:46:18Z)
• Leveraging Large Language Models for Enhancing the Understandability of Generated Unit Tests [4.574205608859157]
  We introduce UTGen, which combines search-based software testing and large language models to enhance the understandability of automatically generated test cases. We observe that participants working on assignments with UTGen test cases fix up to 33% more bugs and use up to 20% less time when compared to baseline test cases.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-08-21T15:35:34Z)
• A System for Automated Unit Test Generation Using Large Language Models and Assessment of Generated Test Suites [1.4563527353943984]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) have been applied to various aspects of software development. We present AgoneTest: an automated system for generating test suites for Java projects.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-08-14T23:02:16Z)
• Harnessing the Power of LLMs: Automating Unit Test Generation for High-Performance Computing [7.3166218350585135]
  Unit testing is crucial in software engineering for ensuring quality. It's not widely used in parallel and high-performance computing software, particularly scientific applications. We propose an automated method for generating unit tests for such software.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-07-06T22:45:55Z)
• Protecting Copyrighted Material with Unique Identifiers in Large Language Model Training [55.321010757641524]
  A major public concern regarding the training of large language models (LLMs) is whether they abusing copyrighted online text. Previous membership inference methods may be misled by similar examples in vast amounts of training data. We propose an alternative textitinsert-and-detection methodology, advocating that web users and content platforms employ textbftextitunique identifiers.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-03-23T06:36:32Z)
• Prompting Code Interpreter to Write Better Unit Tests on Quixbugs Functions [0.05657375260432172]
  Unit testing is a commonly-used approach in software engineering to test the correctness and robustness of written code. In this study, we explore the effect of different prompts on the quality of unit tests generated by Code Interpreter. We find that the quality of the generated unit tests is not sensitive to changes in minor details in the prompts provided.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-09-30T20:36:23Z)
• Beyond Accuracy: Behavioral Testing of NLP models with CheckList [66.42971817954806]
  CheckList is a task-agnostic methodology for testing NLP models. CheckList includes a matrix of general linguistic capabilities and test types that facilitate comprehensive test ideation. In a user study, NLP practitioners with CheckList created twice as many tests, and found almost three times as many bugs as users without it.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-05-08T15:48:31Z)

This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.

This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.