Just-in-Time Catching Test Generation at Meta
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
We report on Just-in-Time catching test generation at Meta, designed to prevent bugs in large scale backend systems of hundreds of millions of line of code. Unlike traditional hardening tests, which pass at generation time, catching tests are meant to fail, surfacing bugs before code lands. The primary challenge is to reduce development drag from false positive test failures. Analyzing 22,126 generated tests, we show code-change-aware methods improve candidate catch generation 4x over hardening tests and 20x over coincidentally failing tests. To address false positives, we use rule-based and LLM-based assessors. These assessors reduce human review load by 70%. Inferential statistical analysis showed that human-accepted code changes are assessed to have significantly more false positives, while human-rejected changes have significantly more true positives. We reported 41 candidate catches to engineers; 8 were confirmed to be true positives, 4 of which would have led to serious failures had they remained uncaught. Overall, our results show that Just-in-Time catching is scalable, industrially applicable, and that it prevents serious failures from reaching production.
Key facts. Cited by 1 paper in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 17 of its 75 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 30 Jan 2026.
Builds on
17 of 75 references.
References · 17
- 2023Judging LLM-as-a-Judge with MT-Bench and Chatbot Arenacited by 8,393
- 2023An Empirical Evaluation of Using Large Language Models for Automated Unit Test Generationcited by 193
- 2023Software Testing with Large Language Models: Survey, Landscape, and Visioncited by 163
- 2023ChatUniTest: A Framework for LLM-Based Test Generationcited by 94
- 2024Automated Unit Test Improvement using Large Language Models at Metacited by 73
- 2024Code-Aware Prompting: A study of Coverage Guided Test Generation in Regression Setting using LLMcited by 63
- 2018The Art, Science, and Engineering of Fuzzing: A Surveycited by 61
- 2023Security Weaknesses of Copilot-Generated Code in GitHub Projects: An Empirical Studycited by 36
- 2024TOGLL: Correct and Strong Test Oracle Generation with LLMscited by 23
- 2025Mutation-Guided LLM-based Test Generation at Metacited by 23
- 2024Generative AI for Pull Request Descriptions: Adoption, Impact, and Developer Interventionscited by 10
- 2020WES: Agent-based User Interaction Simulation on Real Infrastructurecited by 8
5 more
- 2023Perfect is the enemy of test oraclecited by 6
- 2024Moving Faster and Reducing Risk: Using LLMs in Release Deploymentcited by 6
- 2024Observation-based unit test generation at Metacited by 5
- 2024Enhancing Testing at Meta with Rich-State Simulated Populationscited by 2
- 2025Harden and Catch for Just-in-Time Assured LLM-Based Software Testing: Open Research Challengescited by 1
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2026: 1.
1 paper.