Impact of Code Context and Prompting Strategies on Automated Unit Test Generation with Modern General-Purpose Large Language Models

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2507.14256v1
• Date: Fri, 18 Jul 2025 11:23:17 GMT
• Title: Impact of Code Context and Prompting Strategies on Automated Unit Test Generation with Modern General-Purpose Large Language Models
• Authors: Jakub Walczak, Piotr Tomalak, Artur Laskowski,
• Abstract summary: Generative AI is gaining increasing attention in software engineering.<n>Unit tests constitute the majority of test cases and are often schematic.<n>This paper investigates the impact of code context and prompting strategies on the quality and adequacy of unit tests.
• Score: 0.0
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: Generative AI is gaining increasing attention in software engineering, where testing remains an indispensable reliability mechanism. According to the widely adopted testing pyramid, unit tests constitute the majority of test cases and are often schematic, requiring minimal domain expertise. Automatically generating such tests under the supervision of software engineers can significantly enhance productivity during the development phase of the software lifecycle. This paper investigates the impact of code context and prompting strategies on the quality and adequacy of unit tests generated by various large language models (LLMs) across several families. The results show that including docstrings notably improves code adequacy, while further extending context to the full implementation yields definitely smaller gains. Notably, the chain-of-thought prompting strategy -- applied even to 'reasoning' models -- achieves the best results, with up to 96.3\% branch coverage, a 57\% average mutation score, and near-perfect compilation success rate. Among the evaluated models, M5 (Gemini 2.5 Pro) demonstrated superior performance in both mutation score and branch coverage being still in top in terms of compilation success rate. All the code and resulting test suites are publicly available at https://github.com/peetery/LLM-analysis.

Related papers

• Seed&Steer: Guiding Large Language Models with Compilable Prefix and Branch Signals for Unit Test Generation [20.083515771706473]
  Unit tests play a vital role in the software development lifecycle.<n>Recent advances in Large Language Model (LLM)-based approaches have significantly improved automated test generation.<n>We propose Seed&Steer, a two-step approach that combines traditional unit testing techniques with the capabilities of large language models.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-07-23T07:16:46Z)
• Boosting Rust Unit Test Coverage through Hybrid Program Analysis and Large Language Models [14.536415473544146]
  This paper presents PALM, an approach that leverages large language models (LLMs) to enhance the generation of high-coverage unit tests.<n> PALM performs program analysis to identify branching conditions within functions, which are then combined into path constraints.<n>We implement the approach and evaluate it in 10 open-source Rust crates.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-06-10T17:21:21Z)
• Training Language Models to Generate Quality Code with Program Analysis Feedback [66.0854002147103]
  Code generation with large language models (LLMs) is increasingly adopted in production but fails to ensure code quality.<n>We propose REAL, a reinforcement learning framework that incentivizes LLMs to generate production-quality code.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-05-28T17:57:47Z)
• Sample, Don't Search: Rethinking Test-Time Alignment for Language Models [55.2480439325792]
  We introduce QAlign, a new test-time alignment approach.<n>As we scale test-time compute, QAlign converges to sampling from the optimal aligned distribution for each individual prompt.<n>By adopting recent advances in Markov chain Monte Carlo for text generation, our method enables better-aligned outputs without modifying the underlying model or even requiring logit access.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-04-04T00:41:40Z)
• Thinking Longer, Not Larger: Enhancing Software Engineering Agents via Scaling Test-Time Compute [61.00662702026523]
  We propose a unified Test-Time Compute scaling framework that leverages increased inference-time instead of larger models.<n>Our framework incorporates two complementary strategies: internal TTC and external TTC.<n>We demonstrate our textbf32B model achieves a 46% issue resolution rate, surpassing significantly larger models such as DeepSeek R1 671B and OpenAI o1.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-03-31T07:31:32Z)
• Learning to Solve and Verify: A Self-Play Framework for Code and Test Generation [69.62857948698436]
  Recent advances in large language models (LLMs) have improved their performance on coding benchmarks.<n>However, improvement is plateauing due to the exhaustion of readily available high-quality data.<n>We propose Sol-Ver, a self-play solver-verifier framework that jointly improves a single model's code and test generation capacity.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-02-20T18:32:19Z)
• 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)
• 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.<n>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)
• SWT-Bench: Testing and Validating Real-World Bug-Fixes with Code Agents [10.730852617039451]
  We investigate the capability of LLM-based Code Agents to formalize user issues into test cases.<n>We propose a novel benchmark based on popular GitHub repositories, containing real-world issues, ground-truth bug-fixes, and golden tests.<n>We find that LLMs generally perform surprisingly well at generating relevant test cases, with Code Agents designed for code repair exceeding the performance of systems designed for test generation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-18T14:54:37Z)
• Code-Aware Prompting: A study of Coverage Guided Test Generation in Regression Setting using LLM [32.44432906540792]
  We present SymPrompt, a code-aware prompting strategy for large language models in test generation. SymPrompt enhances correct test generations by a factor of 5 and bolsters relative coverage by 26% for CodeGen2. Notably, when applied to GPT-4, SymPrompt improves coverage by over 2x compared to baseline prompting strategies.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-01-31T18:21:49Z)

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.