DiffSpec: Differential Testing with LLMs using Natural Language Specifications and Code Artifacts

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2410.04249v2
• Date: Wed, 23 Oct 2024 09:46:43 GMT
• Title: DiffSpec: Differential Testing with LLMs using Natural Language Specifications and Code Artifacts
• Authors: Nikitha Rao, Elizabeth Gilbert, Tahina Ramananandro, Nikhil Swamy, Claire Le Goues, Sarah Fakhoury,
• Abstract summary: We introduce DiffSpec, a framework for generating differential tests with large language models. We demonstrate the efficacy of DiffSpec on two different systems, namely, eBPF runtimes and Wasm validators.
• Score: 6.222103009114668
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: Differential testing can be an effective way to find bugs in software systems with multiple implementations that conform to the same specification, like compilers, network protocol parsers, and language runtimes. Specifications for such systems are often standardized in natural language documents, like Instruction Set Architecture (ISA) specifications, Wasm specifications or IETF RFC's. Large Language Models (LLMs) have demonstrated potential in both generating tests and handling large volumes of natural language text, making them well-suited for utilizing artifacts like specification documents, bug reports, and code implementations. In this work, we leverage natural language and code artifacts to guide LLMs to generate targeted, meaningful tests that highlight meaningful behavioral differences between implementations, including those corresponding to bugs. We introduce DiffSpec, a framework for generating differential tests with LLMs using prompt chaining. We demonstrate the efficacy of DiffSpec on two different systems, namely, eBPF runtimes and Wasm validators. Using DiffSpec, we generated 359 differentiating tests, uncovering at least four distinct and confirmed bugs in eBPF, including a kernel memory leak, inconsistent behavior in jump instructions, and undefined behavior when using the stack pointer. We also found 279 differentiating tests in Wasm validators, that point to at least 2 confirmed and fixed bugs in Wizard Engine.

Related papers

• SpecTool: A Benchmark for Characterizing Errors in Tool-Use LLMs [77.79172008184415]
  SpecTool is a new benchmark to identify error patterns in LLM output on tool-use tasks. We show that even the most prominent LLMs exhibit these error patterns in their outputs. Researchers can use the analysis and insights from SPECTOOL to guide their error mitigation strategies.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-11-20T18:56:22Z)
• MdEval: Massively Multilingual Code Debugging [37.48700033342978]
  We propose the first massively multilingual debug benchmark, which includes 3.6K test samples of 18 programming languages. We introduce the instruction corpora MDEVAL-INSTRUCT by injecting bugs into the correct multilingual queries and solutions. Our experiments on MDEVAL reveal a notable performance gap between open-source models and closed-source LLMs.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-11-04T17:36:40Z)
• Test smells in LLM-Generated Unit Tests [11.517293765116307]
  This study explores the diffusion of test smells in Large Language Models generated unit test suites. We analyze a benchmark of 20,500 LLM-generated test suites produced by four models across five prompt engineering techniques. We identify and analyze the prevalence and co-occurrence of various test smells in both human written and LLM-generated test suites.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-14T15:35:44Z)
• Understanding and Mitigating Language Confusion in LLMs [76.96033035093204]
  We evaluate 15 typologically diverse languages with existing and newly-created English and multilingual prompts. We find that Llama Instruct and Mistral models exhibit high degrees of language confusion. We find that language confusion can be partially mitigated via few-shot prompting, multilingual SFT and preference tuning.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-28T17:03:51Z)
• Mutation-based Consistency Testing for Evaluating the Code Understanding Capability of LLMs [5.549095839198671]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) have shown remarkable capabilities in processing both natural and programming languages. We propose a novel method to assess the code understanding performance of LLMs, particularly focusing on subtle differences between code and its descriptions. We apply different types of code mutations, such as operator replacement and statement deletion, to generate inconsistent code-description pairs. We conduct a case study on the two popular LLMs, GPT-3.5 and GPT-4, using the state-of-the-art code generation benchmark, HumanEval-X.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-01-11T14:27:43Z)
• DebugBench: Evaluating Debugging Capability of Large Language Models [80.73121177868357]
  DebugBench is a benchmark for Large Language Models (LLMs) It covers four major bug categories and 18 minor types in C++, Java, and Python. We evaluate two commercial and four open-source models in a zero-shot scenario.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-01-09T15:46:38Z)
• Native Language Identification with Large Language Models [60.80452362519818]
  We show that GPT models are proficient at NLI classification, with GPT-4 setting a new performance record of 91.7% on the benchmark11 test set in a zero-shot setting. We also show that unlike previous fully-supervised settings, LLMs can perform NLI without being limited to a set of known classes.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-12-13T00:52:15Z)
• 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)
• Intergenerational Test Generation for Natural Language Processing Applications [16.63835131985415]
  We propose an automated test generation method for detecting erroneous behaviors of various NLP applications. We implement this method into NLPLego, which is designed to fully exploit the potential of seed sentences. NLPLego successfully detects 1,732, 5301, and 261,879 incorrect behaviors with around 95.7% precision in three tasks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-02-21T07:57:59Z)
• Zero-Shot Cross-lingual Semantic Parsing [56.95036511882921]
  We study cross-lingual semantic parsing as a zero-shot problem without parallel data for 7 test languages. We propose a multi-task encoder-decoder model to transfer parsing knowledge to additional languages using only English-Logical form paired data. Our system frames zero-shot parsing as a latent-space alignment problem and finds that pre-trained models can be improved to generate logical forms with minimal cross-lingual transfer penalty.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-04-15T16:08:43Z)
• X-FACTR: Multilingual Factual Knowledge Retrieval from Pretrained Language Models [103.75890012041366]
  Language models (LMs) have proven surprisingly successful at capturing factual knowledge. However, studies on LMs' factual representation ability have almost invariably been performed on English. We create a benchmark of cloze-style probes for 23 typologically diverse languages.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-10-13T05:29:56Z)

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.