mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

Assessing Evaluation Metrics for Neural Test Oracle Generation

arXiv 2310.07856 ↗First posted 11 Oct 2023cs.CL cs.SEcited by 7

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

In this work, we revisit existing oracle generation studies plus ChatGPT to empirically investigate the current standing of their performance in both NLG-based and test adequacy metrics. Specifically, we train and run four state-of-the-art test oracle generation models on five NLG-based and two test adequacy metrics for our analysis. We apply two different correlation analyses between these two different sets of metrics. Surprisingly, we found no significant correlation between the NLG-based metrics and test adequacy metrics. For instance, oracles generated from ChatGPT on the project activemq-artemis had the highest performance on all the NLG-based metrics among the studied NOGs, however, it had the most number of projects with a decrease in test adequacy metrics compared to all the studied NOGs. We further conduct a qualitative analysis to explore the reasons behind our observations, we found that oracles with high NLG-based metrics but low test adequacy metrics tend to have complex or multiple chained method invocations within the oracle's parameters, making it hard for the model to generate completely, affecting the test adequacy metrics. On the other hand, oracles with low NLG-based metrics but high test adequacy metrics tend to have to call different assertion types or a different method that functions similarly to the ones in the ground truth. Overall, this work complements prior studies on test oracle generation with an extensive performance evaluation with both NLG and test adequacy metrics and provides guidelines for better assessment of deep learning applications in software test generation in the future.

Key facts. Cited by 7 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 25 of its 70 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 11 Oct 2023.

Builds on

25 of 70 references.

References · 25

  1. 2020CodeBERT: A Pre-Trained Model for Programming and Natural Languagescited by 1,286
  2. 2021CodeXGLUE: A Machine Learning Benchmark Dataset for Code Understanding and Generationcited by 732
  3. 2020CodeBLEU: a Method for Automatic Evaluation of Code Synthesiscited by 468
  4. 2023Benchmarking Large Language Models in Retrieval-Augmented Generationcited by 307
  5. 2020IntelliCode Compose: Code Generation Using Transformercited by 225
  6. 2023Software Testing with Large Language Models: Survey, Landscape, and Visioncited by 163
  7. 2020Tangled up in BLEU: Reevaluating the Evaluation of Automatic Machine Translation Evaluation Metricscited by 155
  8. 2020Unit Test Case Generation with Transformers and Focal Contextcited by 118
  9. 2022Large Language Models are Few-shot Testers: Exploring LLM-based General Bug Reproductioncited by 110
  10. 2023No More Manual Tests? Evaluating and Improving ChatGPT for Unit Test Generationcited by 82
  11. 2021Studying the Usage of Text-To-Text Transfer Transformer to Support Code-Related Taskscited by 70
  12. 2022Out of the BLEU: how should we assess quality of the Code Generation models?cited by 65
13 more
  1. 2021TOGA: A Neural Method for Test Oracle Generationcited by 57
  2. 2019Does BLEU Score Work for Code Migration?cited by 49
  3. 2019Recommendations for Datasets for Source Code Summarizationcited by 46
  4. 2020On Learning Meaningful Assert Statements for Unit Test Casescited by 42
  5. 2023Learning Deep Semantics for Test Completioncited by 31
  6. 2020Generating Accurate Assert Statements for Unit Test Cases using Pretrained Transformerscited by 30
  7. 2022Using Transfer Learning for Code-Related Taskscited by 18
  8. 2022Methods2Test: A dataset of focal methods mapped to test casescited by 10
  9. 2022Who Evaluates the Evaluators? On Automatic Metrics for Assessing AI-based Offensive Code Generatorscited by 10
  10. 2023Towards More Realistic Evaluation for Neural Test Oracle Generationcited by 8
  11. 2018Human vs Automatic Metrics: on the Importance of Correlation Designcited by 6
  12. 2020ReAssert: Deep Learning for Assert Generationcited by 6
  13. 2023Perfect is the enemy of test oraclecited by 6

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 7 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2024: 4; 2025: 1; 2026: 2.

7 papers.