# Private GPTs for LLM-driven testing in software development and machine learning

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2506.06509 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2506.06509/

## Key facts

- Cited by 1 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Builds on 2 of its 4 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 6 Jun 2025.

## Builds on (most cited first, 2 of 2)

- [A Survey on Evaluation of Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2307.03109/) (2023)
- [Retrieval Augmented Generation (RAG) and Beyond: A Comprehensive Survey on How to Make your LLMs use External Data More Wisely](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2409.14924/) (2024)

## Built on by (most cited first, 1 of 1)

- [Multi-Large Language Model Orchestrated Severity Assessment of Clinical Records (MOSAIC)](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2607.05032/) (2026)

## Abstract (arXiv)

In this contribution, we examine the capability of private GPTs to automatically generate executable test code based on requirements. More specifically, we use acceptance criteria as input, formulated as part of epics, or stories, which are typically used in modern development processes. This gives product owners, or business intelligence, respectively, a way to directly produce testable criteria through the use of LLMs. We explore the quality of the so-produced tests in two ways: i) directly by letting the LLM generate code from requirements, ii) through an intermediate step using Gherkin syntax. As a result, it turns out that the two-step procedure yields better results -where we define better in terms of human readability and best coding practices, i.e. lines of code and use of additional libraries typically used in testing. Concretely, we evaluate prompt effectiveness across two scenarios: a simple "Hello World" program and a digit classification model, showing that structured prompts lead to higher-quality test outputs.