mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

On the Potential and Limitations of Few-Shot In-Context Learning to Generate Metamorphic Specifications for Tax Preparation Software

arXiv 2311.11979 ↗First posted 20 Nov 2023cs.SE cs.CLcited by 3

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Due to the ever-increasing complexity of income tax laws in the United States, the number of US taxpayers filing their taxes using tax preparation software (henceforth, tax software) continues to increase. According to the U.S. Internal Revenue Service (IRS), in FY22, nearly 50% of taxpayers filed their individual income taxes using tax software. Given the legal consequences of incorrectly filing taxes for the taxpayer, ensuring the correctness of tax software is of paramount importance. Metamorphic testing has emerged as a leading solution to test and debug legal-critical tax software due to the absence of correctness requirements and trustworthy datasets. The key idea behind metamorphic testing is to express the properties of a system in terms of the relationship between one input and its slightly metamorphosed twinned input. Extracting metamorphic properties from IRS tax publications is a tedious and time-consuming process. As a response, this paper formulates the task of generating metamorphic specifications as a translation task between properties extracted from tax documents - expressed in natural language - to a contrastive first-order logic form. We perform a systematic analysis on the potential and limitations of in-context learning with Large Language Models(LLMs) for this task, and outline a research agenda towards automating the generation of metamorphic specifications for tax preparation software.

Key facts. Cited by 3 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 14 of its 41 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 20 Nov 2023.

Builds on

14 of 41 references.

References · 14

  1. 2020Language Models are Few-Shot Learnerscited by 32,199
  2. 2021LoRA: Low-Rank Adaptation of Large Language Modelscited by 14,084
  3. 2022Self-Instruct: Aligning Language Models with Self-Generated Instructionscited by 2,674
  4. 2020Don't Stop Pretraining: Adapt Language Models to Domains and Taskscited by 1,548
  5. 2020BLEURT: Learning Robust Metrics for Text Generationcited by 1,196
  6. 2022Decomposed Prompting: A Modular Approach for Solving Complex Taskscited by 554
  7. 2022Prompting GPT-3 To Be Reliablecited by 258
  8. 2020Metamorphic Testing: A New Approach for Generating Next Test Casescited by 71
  9. 2018A Survey on Semantic Parsingcited by 62
  10. 2021Few-Shot Semantic Parsing with Language Models Trained On Codecited by 50
  11. 2022Meet Your Favorite Character: Open-domain Chatbot Mimicking Fictional Characters with only a Few Utterancescited by 32
  12. 2018Semantic Parsing with Syntax- and Table-Aware SQL Generationcited by 17
2 more
  1. 2023Assisting Language Learners: Automated Trans-Lingual Definition Generation via Contrastive Prompt Learningcited by 13
  2. 2022Metamorphic Testing and Debugging of Tax Preparation Softwarecited by 7

Built on by

Cited by year

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

3 papers.