mlsanityData to 13 Oct 2026

A System for Automated Unit Test Generation Using Large Language Models and Assessment of Generated Test Suites

arXiv 2408.07846 ↗First posted 14 Aug 2024cs.SE cs.AIcited by 8

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Unit tests represent the most basic level of testing within the software testing lifecycle and are crucial to ensuring software correctness. Designing and creating unit tests is a costly and labor-intensive process that is ripe for automation. Recently, Large Language Models (LLMs) have been applied to various aspects of software development, including unit test generation. Although several empirical studies evaluating LLMs' capabilities in test code generation exist, they primarily focus on simple scenarios, such as the straightforward generation of unit tests for individual methods. These evaluations often involve independent and small-scale test units, providing a limited view of LLMs' performance in real-world software development scenarios. Moreover, previous studies do not approach the problem at a suitable scale for real-life applications. Generated unit tests are often evaluated via manual integration into the original projects, a process that limits the number of tests executed and reduces overall efficiency. To address these gaps, we have developed an approach for generating and evaluating more real-life complexity test suites. Our approach focuses on class-level test code generation and automates the entire process from test generation to test assessment. In this work, we present AgoneTest: an automated system for generating test suites for Java projects and a comprehensive and principled methodology for evaluating the generated test suites. Starting from a state-of-the-art dataset (i.e., Methods2Test), we built a new dataset for comparing human-written tests with those generated by LLMs. Our key contributions include a scalable automated software system, a new dataset, and a detailed methodology for evaluating test quality.

Key facts. Cited by 8 papers in the map (data through 13 Oct 2026). Builds on 15 of its 37 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 14 Aug 2024.

Builds on

15 of 37 references.

References · 15

  1. 2020Language Models are Few-Shot Learnerscited by 32,320
  2. 2023WizardCoder: Empowering Code Large Language Models with Evol-Instructcited by 731
  3. 2024A Systematic Survey of Prompt Engineering in Large Language Models: Techniques and Applicationscited by 430
  4. 2023An Empirical Evaluation of Using Large Language Models for Automated Unit Test Generationcited by 194
  5. 2020Unit Test Case Generation with Transformers and Focal Contextcited by 118
  6. 2022Large Language Models are Few-shot Testers: Exploring LLM-based General Bug Reproductioncited by 110
  7. 2022Large Language Models are Zero-Shot Fuzzers: Fuzzing Deep-Learning Libraries via Large Language Modelscited by 103
  8. 2023ChatUniTest: A Framework for LLM-Based Test Generationcited by 95
  9. 2023Fuzz4All: Universal Fuzzing with Large Language Modelscited by 88
  10. 2023No More Manual Tests? Evaluating and Improving ChatGPT for Unit Test Generationcited by 82
  11. 2023Using Large Language Models to Generate JUnit Tests: An Empirical Studycited by 53
  12. 2023ChatGPT vs SBST: A Comparative Assessment of Unit Test Suite Generationcited by 32
3 more
  1. 2023Learning Deep Semantics for Test Completioncited by 31
  2. 2022Methods2Test: A dataset of focal methods mapped to test casescited by 10
  3. 2022Basic Block Coverage for Search-based Unit Testing and Crash Reproductioncited by 4

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 13 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2025: 5; 2026: 3.

8 papers.