Automated Self-Testing as a Quality Gate: Evidence-Driven Release Management for LLM Applications

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2603.15676v1
• Date: Fri, 13 Mar 2026 20:44:15 GMT
• Title: Automated Self-Testing as a Quality Gate: Evidence-Driven Release Management for LLM Applications
• Abstract summary: We present an automated self-testing framework that introduces quality gates with evidence-based release decisions.<n>We evaluate the framework through a longitudinal case study of an internally deployed multi-agent conversational AI system.
• Score: 51.56484100374058
• License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
• Abstract: LLM applications are AI systems whose non-deterministic outputs and evolving model behavior make traditional testing insufficient for release governance. We present an automated self-testing framework that introduces quality gates with evidence-based release decisions (PROMOTE/HOLD/ROLLBACK) across five empirically grounded dimensions: task success rate, research context preservation, P95 latency, safety pass rate, and evidence coverage. We evaluate the framework through a longitudinal case study of an internally deployed multi-agent conversational AI system with specific marketing capabilities in active development, covering 38 evaluation runs across 20+ internal releases. The gate identified two ROLLBACK-grade builds in early runs and supported stable quality evolution over a four-week staging lifecycle while exercising persona-grounded, multi-turn, adversarial, and evidence-required scenarios. Statistical analysis (Mann-Kendall trends, Spearman correlations, bootstrap confidence intervals), gate ablation, and overhead scaling indicate that evidence coverage is the primary severe-regression discriminator and that runtime scales predictably with suite size. A human calibration study (n=60 stratified cases, two independent evaluators, LLM-as-judge cross-validation) reveals complementary multi-modal coverage: LLM-judge disagreements with the system gate (kappa=0.13) are attributable to structural failure modes such as latency violations and routing errors that are invisible in response text alone, while the judge independently surfaces content quality failures missed by structural checks, validating the multi-dimensional gate design. The framework, supplementary pseudocode, and calibration artifacts are provided to support AI-system quality assurance and independent replication.

Related papers

• Statistical Analysis of Executability and Program Equivalence in Decompilation for IoT Vulnerability Detection [1.9637266103693347]
  We propose a nine-dimensional quality evaluation metric consisting of three categories: structural, behavioral, and semantic similarity.<n>Vulnerabilities often arise in details that are easily lost in this process, such as error-handling flows and boundary checks.<n>This study provides a statistical evaluation foundation for quantifying implementation defects in IoT devices.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-08-07T08:36:35Z)
• Decoupling Reconnaissance and Exploitation: Measuring the Capability Boundaries of LLM-Based Web Penetration Testing [8.293465530619246]
  We propose a two-stage decoupled evaluation framework that separates exploit execution from reconnaissance.<n>We empirically evaluate five open-source penetration-testing agents, covering multiagent, monolithic, and graph-driven architectures.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-06-24T02:51:58Z)
• Gatekeepers and Hallucinations: A Layered Evaluation Framework for LLM-Driven Quantum Circuit Generation [0.0]
  We present a layered evaluation framework for materials-informed Variational Quantum Eigensolver (VQE) circuit generation.<n>We surface a taxonomy of five distinct LLM failure modes (geometry hallucination, nonexistent API usage, integration failures, constraint violations, and plausible-but-unverifiable output)<n>A forensic audit of the evaluation platform's own source code further establishes that two apparent model failures originated in the harness through silent fallback-template substitution.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-06-16T19:17:54Z)
• From Knowing to Acting: Benchmarking Self-Awareness Capability of LLM Agents [69.07911499189129]
  We introduce KAPRO, a framework that evaluates cognitive-behavioral alignment by decoupling an agent's metacognitive judgment (Knowing) from its spontaneous execution (Acting)<n>Experiments show that self-awareness capability is strongly correlated with task success but degrades sharply in internal-capability settings.<n> proprietary and reasoning-oriented models demonstrate more reliable cognitive gating.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-06-09T17:17:08Z)
• Evaluating Prompt Injection Defenses for Educational LLM Tutors: Security-Usability-Latency Trade-offs [51.56484100374058]
  guardrail design entails explicit trade-offs among adversarial robustness, benign-task usability, and response latency.<n>We evaluate a domain-specific multi-layer safeguard pipeline combining deterministic pattern filters, structural validation, contextual sandboxing, and session-level behavioral checks.<n>Results expose operational trade-offs: NeMo reaches 0 percent bypass at 16.22 percent FPR and roughly 1.5s latency, while Prompt Guard yields 38.48 percent bypass with 3.60 percent FPR.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-03-29T18:52:01Z)
• Learning to Pay Attention: Unsupervised Modeling of Attentive and Inattentive Respondents in Survey Data [0.14323566945483493]
  Traditional safeguards, such as attention checks, are often costly, reactive, and inconsistent.<n>We propose a unified, label-free framework for inattentiveness detection using complementary unsupervised views.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-03-02T22:11:51Z)
• The Emergence of Lab-Driven Alignment Signatures: A Psychometric Framework for Auditing Latent Bias and Compounding Risk in Generative AI [0.0]
  This paper introduces a novel auditing framework to quantify latent trait estimation under ordinal uncertainty.<n>The research audits nine leading models across dimensions including Optimization Bias, Sycophancy, and Status-Quo Legitimization.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-02-19T06:56:01Z)
• AgentFixer: From Failure Detection to Fix Recommendations in LLM Agentic Systems [7.429835301272413]
  The framework includes fifteen failure-detection tools and two root-cause analysis modules.<n>It integrates lightweight rule-based checks with LLM-as-a-judge assessments to support structured incident detection, classification, and repair.<n>We applied the framework to IBM CUGA, evaluating its performance on the AppWorld and WebArena benchmarks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-02-18T14:55:35Z)
• From Internal Diagnosis to External Auditing: A VLM-Driven Paradigm for Online Test-Time Backdoor Defense [6.783000267839024]
  PRISM achieves state-of-the-art performance, suppressing Attack Success Rate to 1% on CIFAR-10 while improving clean accuracy, establishing a new standard for model-agnostic, externalized security.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-01-27T10:34:06Z)
• The Rise of Agentic Testing: Multi-Agent Systems for Robust Software Quality Assurance [0.0]
  Current AI-based test generators produce invalid, redundant, or non-executable tests due to lack of execution aware feedback.<n>This paper introduces a closed-loop, self-correcting system in which a Test Generation Agent, an Execution and Analysis Agent, and a Review and Optimization Agent collaboratively generate, execute, analyze, and refine tests.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-01-05T18:20:14Z)
• Cross-LLM Generalization of Behavioral Backdoor Detection in AI Agent Supply Chains [0.0]
  We present the first systematic study of cross-LLM behavioral backdoor detection.<n>We show that single-model detectors achieve 92.7% accuracy within their training distribution but only 49.2% across different LLMs.<n>We show that model-aware detection model identity as an additional feature achieves 90.6% accuracy universally across all evaluated models.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-11-25T03:33:04Z)
• Making LLMs Reliable When It Matters Most: A Five-Layer Architecture for High-Stakes Decisions [51.56484100374058]
  Current large language models (LLMs) excel in verifiable domains where outputs can be checked before action but prove less reliable for high-stakes strategic decisions with uncertain outcomes.<n>This gap, driven by mutually cognitive biases in both humans and artificial intelligence (AI) systems, threatens the defensibility of valuations and sustainability of investments in the sector.<n>This report describes a framework emerging from systematic qualitative assessment across 7 frontier-grade LLMs and 3 market-facing venture vignettes under time pressure.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-11-10T22:24:21Z)
• Demystifying deep search: a holistic evaluation with hint-free multi-hop questions and factorised metrics [89.1999907891494]
  We present WebDetective, a benchmark of hint-free multi-hop questions paired with a controlled Wikipedia sandbox.<n>Our evaluation of 25 state-of-the-art models reveals systematic weaknesses across all architectures.<n>We develop an agentic workflow, EvidenceLoop, that explicitly targets the challenges our benchmark identifies.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-10-01T07:59:03Z)
• Lie Detector: Unified Backdoor Detection via Cross-Examination Framework [68.45399098884364]
  We propose a unified backdoor detection framework in the semi-honest setting.<n>Our method achieves superior detection performance, improving accuracy by 5.4%, 1.6%, and 11.9% over SoTA baselines.<n> Notably, it is the first to effectively detect backdoors in multimodal large language models.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-03-21T06:12:06Z)

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.