mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

TDD-Bench Verified: Can LLMs Generate Tests for Issues Before They Get Resolved?

arXiv 2412.02883 ↗First posted 3 Dec 2024cs.SE cs.CL cs.LGcited by 32

Not on the map. Why?

Cited by 21 in LLM agents and tool use, but placed by its own abstract, which didn’t fit.

Abstract (arXiv)

Test-driven development (TDD) is the practice of writing tests first and coding later, and the proponents of TDD expound its numerous benefits. For instance, given an issue on a source code repository, tests can clarify the desired behavior among stake-holders before anyone writes code for the agreed-upon fix. Although there has been a lot of work on automated test generation for the practice "write code first, test later", there has been little such automation for TDD. Ideally, tests for TDD should be fail-to-pass (i.e., fail before the issue is resolved and pass after) and have good adequacy with respect to covering the code changed during issue resolution. This paper introduces TDD-Bench Verified, a high-quality benchmark suite of 449 issues mined from real-world GitHub code repositories. The benchmark's evaluation harness runs only relevant tests in isolation for simple yet accurate coverage measurements, and the benchmark's dataset is filtered both by human judges and by execution in the harness. This paper also presents Auto-TDD, an LLM-based solution that takes as input an issue description and a codebase (prior to issue resolution) and returns as output a test that can be used to validate the changes made for resolving the issue. Our evaluation shows that Auto-TDD yields a better fail-to-pass rate than the strongest prior work while also yielding high coverage adequacy. Overall, we hope that this work helps make developers more productive at resolving issues while simultaneously leading to more robust fixes.

Key facts. Cited by 32 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 26 of its 54 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 3 Dec 2024.

Builds on

26 of 54 references.

References · 26

  1. 2020Language Models are Few-Shot Learnerscited by 32,199
  2. 2021Evaluating Large Language Models Trained on Codecited by 8,053
  3. 2023SWE-bench: Can Language Models Resolve Real-World GitHub Issues?cited by 3,193
  4. 2024SWE-agent: Agent-Computer Interfaces Enable Automated Software Engineeringcited by 1,628
  5. 2023Is Your Code Generated by ChatGPT Really Correct? Rigorous Evaluation of Large Language Models for Code Generationcited by 1,332
  6. 2023Instruction Tuning with GPT-4cited by 676
  7. 2023Instruction Tuning for Large Language Models: A Surveycited by 617
  8. 2024Agentless: Demystifying LLM-based Software Engineering Agentscited by 400
  9. 2024SWE-bench Multimodal: Do AI Systems Generalize to Visual Software Domains?cited by 196
  10. 2024MAGIS: LLM-Based Multi-Agent Framework for GitHub Issue Resolutioncited by 132
  11. 2024SWT-Bench: Testing and Validating Real-World Bug-Fixes with Code Agentscited by 129
  12. 2020Unit Test Case Generation with Transformers and Focal Contextcited by 118
14 more
  1. 2024SWE-Bench+: Enhanced Coding Benchmark for LLMscited by 95
  2. 2024CodeR: Issue Resolving with Multi-Agent and Task Graphscited by 89
  3. 2024SpecRover: Code Intent Extraction via LLMscited by 71
  4. 2021AVATAR: A Parallel Corpus for Java-Python Program Translationcited by 59
  5. 2024Alibaba LingmaAgent: Improving Automated Issue Resolution via Comprehensive Repository Explorationcited by 58
  6. 2024MASAI: Modular Architecture for Software-engineering AI Agentscited by 49
  7. 2024TestGenEval: A Real World Unit Test Generation and Test Completion Benchmarkcited by 49
  8. 2022Code Generation Tools (Almost) for Free? A Study of Few-Shot, Pre-Trained Language Models on Codecited by 39
  9. 2024TESTEVAL: Benchmarking Large Language Models for Test Case Generationcited by 38
  10. 2024SWE-bench-java: A GitHub Issue Resolving Benchmark for Javacited by 34
  11. 2023Can Large Language Models Write Good Property-Based Tests?cited by 30
  12. 2024PyBench: Evaluating LLM Agent on various real-world coding taskscited by 24
  13. 2024ASTER: Natural and Multi-language Unit Test Generation with LLMscited by 9
  14. 2024Can Github issues be solved with Tree Of Thoughts?cited by 3

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 7 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2025: 17; 2026: 15.

32 papers.

Sort:

By area:

  1. 2025Survey on Evaluation of LLM-based Agentscited by 190
  2. 2025Understanding Software Engineering Agents: A Study of Thought-Action-Result Trajectoriescited by 75
  3. 2025Otter: Generating Tests from Issues to Validate SWE Patchescited by 24
  4. 2025GSO: Challenging Software Optimization Tasks for Evaluating SWE-Agentscited by 24
  5. 2025HardTests: Synthesizing High-Quality Test Cases for LLM Codingcited by 22
  6. 2025Agentic Bug Reproduction for Effective Automated Program Repair at Googlecited by 20
  7. 2026Self-Improvements in Modern Agentic Systems: A Surveycited by 17
  8. 2025Understanding Automated Program Repair Agents Through the Lens of Traceability: An Empirical Studycited by 16
  9. 2025FaultLine: Automated Proof-of-Vulnerability Generation Using LLM Agentscited by 11
  10. 2025Scoring Verifiers: Evaluating Synthetic Verification for Code and Reasoningcited by 8
  11. 2025SeaView: Software Engineering Agent Visual Interface for Enhanced Workflowcited by 7
  12. 2025InfCode: Adversarial Iterative Refinement of Tests and Patches for Reliable Software Issue Resolutioncited by 7
20 more
  1. 2025Agentic Software Issue Resolution with Large Language Models: A Surveycited by 6
  2. 2026Dynamic Cogeneration of Bug Reproduction Test in Agentic Program Repaircited by 6
  3. 2025TDFlow: Agentic Workflows for Test Driven Developmentcited by 5
  4. 2026Are Coding Agents Generating Over-Mocked Tests? An Empirical Studycited by 5
  5. 2026TestExplora: Benchmarking LLMs for Proactive Bug Discovery via Repository-Level Test Generationcited by 5
  6. 2025How Many Code and Test Cases Are Enough? Evaluating Test Cases Generation from a Binary-Matrix Perspectivecited by 4
  7. 2025Investigating Test Overfitting on SWE-benchcited by 4
  8. 2026SWE-Tester: Training Open-Source LLMs for Issue Reproduction in Real-World Repositoriescited by 4
  9. 2026From Plan to Action: How Well Do Agents Follow the Plan?cited by 4
  10. 2026SWE-Doctor: Guiding Software Engineering Agents with Runtime Diagnosis from Multi-Faceted Bug Reproduction Testscited by 4
  11. 2025CoreCodeBench: Decoupling Code Intelligence via Fine-Grained Repository-Level Taskscited by 3
  12. 2025Empowering Real-World: A Survey on the Technology, Practice, and Evaluation of LLM-driven Industry Agentscited by 2
  13. 2026Resolving Java Code Repository Issues with iSWE Agentcited by 1
  14. 2026Breaking, Stale, or Missing? Benchmarking Coding Agents on Project-Level Test Evolutioncited by 1
  15. 2026Unlocking Model Potentials Through Adaptive Multi-Agent Scaffolding for Efficient Issue Resolutioncited by 1
  16. 2026EvoOtter: Evolutionary Reproduction Test Generatorcited by 1
  17. 2026Evaluating LLM Agents on Automated Software Analysis Taskscited by 0
  18. 2026DPIAgent: Divide, Protocol, Isolate for Agentic Reproduction Test Generationcited by 0
  19. 2026ExecCritic: Learn to Test, Test to Improve for Coding Agentscited by 0
  20. 2026Test-Driven Approaches to Software Engineering with Large Language Models: A Survey of Phases, Tasks, and Agent Skillscited by 0