You Name It, I Run It: An LLM Agent to Execute Tests of Arbitrary Projects

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2412.10133v2
• Date: Wed, 30 Apr 2025 10:25:22 GMT
• Title: You Name It, I Run It: An LLM Agent to Execute Tests of Arbitrary Projects
• Authors: Islem Bouzenia, Michael Pradel,
• Abstract summary: ExecutionAgent is an automated technique that prepares scripts for building an arbitrary project from source code and running its test cases.<n>Our evaluation applies ExecutionAgent to 50 open-source projects that use 14 different programming languages and many different build and testing tools.
• Score: 18.129031749321058
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: The ability to execute the test suite of a project is essential in many scenarios, e.g., to assess code quality and code coverage, to validate code changes made by developers or automated tools, and to ensure compatibility with dependencies. Despite its importance, executing the test suite of a project can be challenging in practice because different projects use different programming languages, software ecosystems, build systems, testing frameworks, and other tools. These challenges make it difficult to create a reliable, universal test execution method that works across different projects. This paper presents ExecutionAgent, an automated technique that prepares scripts for building an arbitrary project from source code and running its test cases. Inspired by the way a human developer would address this task, our approach is a large language model (LLM)-based agent that autonomously executes commands and interacts with the host system. The agent uses meta-prompting to gather guidelines on the latest technologies related to the given project, and it iteratively refines its process based on feedback from the previous steps. Our evaluation applies ExecutionAgent to 50 open-source projects that use 14 different programming languages and many different build and testing tools. The approach successfully executes the test suites of 33/50 projects, while matching the test results of ground truth test suite executions with a deviation of only 7.5%. These results improve over the best previously available technique by 6.6x. The costs imposed by the approach are reasonable, with an execution time of 74 minutes and LLM costs of USD 0.16, on average per project. We envision ExecutionAgent to serve as a valuable tool for developers, automated programming tools, and researchers that need to execute tests across a wide variety of projects.

Related papers

• ProjectTest: A Project-level LLM Unit Test Generation Benchmark and Impact of Error Fixing Mechanisms [48.43237545197775]
  Unit test generation has become a promising and important use case of LLMs. ProjectTest is a project-level benchmark for unit test generation covering Python, Java, and JavaScript.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-02-10T15:24:30Z)
• Commit0: Library Generation from Scratch [77.38414688148006]
  Commit0 is a benchmark that challenges AI agents to write libraries from scratch.<n>Agents are provided with a specification document outlining the library's API as well as a suite of interactive unit tests.<n> 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)
• Codev-Bench: How Do LLMs Understand Developer-Centric Code Completion? [60.84912551069379]
  We present the Code-Development Benchmark (Codev-Bench), a fine-grained, real-world, repository-level, and developer-centric evaluation framework. Codev-Agent is an agent-based system that automates repository crawling, constructs execution environments, extracts dynamic calling chains from existing unit tests, and generates new test samples to avoid data leakage.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-02T09:11:10Z)
• APITestGenie: Automated API Test Generation through Generative AI [2.0716352593701277]
  APITestGenie generates executable API test scripts from business requirements and API specifications. In experiments with 10 real-world APIs, the tool generated valid test scripts 57% of the time. Human intervention is recommended to validate or refine generated scripts before integration into CI/CD pipelines.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-09-05T18:02:41Z)
• Multi-language Unit Test Generation using LLMs [6.259245181881262]
  We describe a generic pipeline that incorporates static analysis to guide LLMs in generating compilable and high-coverage test cases. We show how the pipeline can be applied to different programming languages, specifically Java and Python, and to complex software requiring environment mocking. Our results demonstrate that LLM-based test generation, when guided by static analysis, can be competitive with, and even outperform, state-of-the-art test-generation techniques in coverage achieved.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-09-04T21:46:18Z)
• DOCE: Finding the Sweet Spot for Execution-Based Code Generation [69.5305729627198]
  We propose a comprehensive framework that includes candidate generation, $n$-best reranking, minimum Bayes risk (MBR) decoding, and self-ging as the core components. Our findings highlight the importance of execution-based methods and the difference gap between execution-based and execution-free methods.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-08-25T07:10:36Z)
• 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)
• BigCodeBench: Benchmarking Code Generation with Diverse Function Calls and Complex Instructions [72.56339136017759]
  We introduce BigCodeBench, a benchmark that challenges Large Language Models (LLMs) to invoke multiple function calls as tools from 139 libraries and 7 domains for 1,140 fine-grained tasks. Our evaluation shows that LLMs are not yet capable of following complex instructions to use function calls precisely, with scores up to 60%, significantly lower than the human performance of 97%. We propose a natural-language-oriented variant of BigCodeBench, BigCodeBench-Instruct, that automatically transforms the original docstrings into short instructions only with essential information.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-22T15:52:04Z)
• TESTEVAL: Benchmarking Large Language Models for Test Case Generation [15.343859279282848]
  We propose TESTEVAL, a novel benchmark for test case generation with large language models (LLMs) We collect 210 Python programs from an online programming platform, LeetCode, and design three different tasks: overall coverage, targeted line/branch coverage, and targeted path coverage. We find that generating test cases to cover specific program lines/branches/paths is still challenging for current LLMs.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-06T22:07:50Z)
• DevEval: Evaluating Code Generation in Practical Software Projects [52.16841274646796]
  We propose a new benchmark named DevEval, aligned with Developers' experiences in practical projects. DevEval is collected through a rigorous pipeline, containing 2,690 samples from 119 practical projects. We assess five popular LLMs on DevEval and reveal their actual abilities in code generation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-01-12T06:51:30Z)
• AgentCoder: Multi-Agent-based Code Generation with Iterative Testing and Optimisation [11.155351560550853]
  This paper introduces Multi-Agent Assistant Code Generation (AgentCoder) AgentCoder is a novel solution comprising a multi-agent framework with specialized agents: the programmer agent, the test designer agent, and the test executor agent. Our experiments on 9 code generation models and 12 enhancement approaches showcase AgentCoder's superior performance over existing code generation models.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-12-20T13:22:41Z)
• MLAgentBench: Evaluating Language Agents on Machine Learning Experimentation [96.71370747681078]
  We introduce MLAgentBench, a suite of 13 tasks ranging from improving model performance on CIFAR-10 to recent research problems like BabyLM. For each task, an agent can perform actions like reading/writing files, executing code, and inspecting outputs. We benchmark agents based on Claude v1.0, Claude v2.1, Claude v3 Opus, GPT-4, GPT-4-turbo, Gemini-Pro, and Mixtral and find that a Claude v3 Opus agent is the best in terms of success rate.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-10-05T04:06:12Z)
• LLM for Test Script Generation and Migration: Challenges, Capabilities, and Opportunities [8.504639288314063]
  Test script generation is a vital component of software testing, enabling efficient and reliable automation of repetitive test tasks. Existing generation approaches often encounter limitations, such as difficulties in accurately capturing and reproducing test scripts across diverse devices, platforms, and applications. This paper investigates the application of large language models (LLM) in the domain of mobile application test script generation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-09-24T07:58:57Z)

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.