AsserT5: Test Assertion Generation Using a Fine-Tuned Code Language Model
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Writing good software tests can be challenging, therefore approaches that support developers are desirable. While generating complete tests automatically is such an approach commonly proposed in research, developers may already have specific test scenarios in mind and thus just require help in selecting the most suitable test assertions for these scenarios. This can be done using deep learning models to predict assertions for given test code. Prior research on assertion generation trained these models specifically for the task, raising the question how much the use of larger models pre-trained on code that have emerged since then can improve their performance. In particular, while abstracting identifiers has been shown to improve specifically trained models, it remains unclear whether this also generalises to models pre-trained on non-abstracted code. Finally, even though prior work demonstrated high accuracy it remains unclear how this translates into the effectiveness of the assertions at their intended application -- finding faults. To shed light on these open questions, in this paper we propose AsserT5, a new model based on the pre-trained CodeT5 model, and use this to empirically study assertion generation. We find that the abstraction and the inclusion of the focal method are useful also for a fine-tuned pre-trained model, resulting in test assertions that match the ground truth assertions precisely in up to 59.5% of cases, more than twice as precise as prior models. However, evaluation on real bugs from the Defects4J dataset shows that out of 138 bugs detectable with assertions in real-world projects, AsserT5 was only able to suggest fault-finding assertions for 33, indicating the need for further improvements.
Key facts. Cited by 7 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). First posted on arXiv 4 Feb 2025.
Builds on
No reference list yet.
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2025: 4; 2026: 3.
7 papers.
- 2025Beyond Postconditions: Can Large Language Models infer Formal Contracts for Automatic Software Verification?cited by 5
- 2025Navigating the growing field of research on AI for software testing -- the taxonomy for AI-augmented software testing and an ontology-driven literature surveycited by 2
- 2025Large Language Models for Software Testing: A Research Roadmapcited by 2
- 2025ContractEval: A Benchmark for Evaluating Contract-Satisfying Assertions in Code Generationcited by 2
- 2026All Smoke, No Alarm: Oracle Signals in Agent-Authored Test Codecited by 1
- 2026Multi-Large Language Model Orchestrated Severity Assessment of Clinical Records (MOSAIC)cited by 0
- 2026Agent-Based Test Assertion Generation via Diverse Perspective Aggregationcited by 0
- 2026Agent-Based Test Assertion Generation via Diverse Perspective Aggregation6 Aug 2026
- 2026Multi-Large Language Model Orchestrated Severity Assessment of Clinical Records (MOSAIC)6 Jul 2026
- 2026All Smoke, No Alarm: Oracle Signals in Agent-Authored Test Code16 Jun 2026
- 2025Beyond Postconditions: Can Large Language Models infer Formal Contracts for Automatic Software Verification?14 Oct 2025
- 2025ContractEval: A Benchmark for Evaluating Contract-Satisfying Assertions in Code Generation14 Oct 2025
- 2025Large Language Models for Software Testing: A Research Roadmap29 Sep 2025
- 2025Navigating the growing field of research on AI for software testing -- the taxonomy for AI-augmented software testing and an ontology-driven literature survey17 Jun 2025