Cluster-Aware Dual-Level Test Specification Generation for Large-Scale Automotive Software Requirements
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Generating test specifications that satisfy Automotive SPICE SWE.6 requirements becomes increasingly challenging and time-consuming as projects scale to thousands of requirements. Because this manual process often consumes weeks of engineering effort, automation becomes a critical necessity. However, standard Large Language Model (LLM) approaches struggle at scale: processing requirements individually discards vital inter-requirement dependencies, while feeding entire corpora at once exceeds context-window limits, leading to incomplete integration coverage and redundant test cases. This paper presents a novel "Cluster-then-Summarize" pipeline that addresses these limitations through three-stages. Requirements are embedded using sentence transformers and grouped using UMAP dimensionality reduction followed by HDBSCAN density-based clustering. This grouping utilizes an automatic minimum cluster size selection driven by a quality criterion combining normalized Silhouette and Calinski-Harabasz scores. A multi-level map-reduce summarization algorithm then distills each cluster into concise, domain-conformant descriptions while preserving quantitative thresholds and safety integrity levels. The pipeline exploits the derived cluster topology to generate test specifications at two levels: individual requirement verification and cluster-level integration tests that verify cross-requirement feature behavior. A nearby-cluster context mechanism provides bounded cross-feature awareness during each LLM call, and Retrieval-Augmented Generation grounds all outputs in ISO 26262 and ASPICE standards. Evaluation on automotive requirement datasets of varying scale demonstrates that the cluster-aware approach improves integration test coverage and maintains summarization fidelity compared to baseline methods while scaling efficiently to thousands of requirements.
Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 10 of its 36 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 15 Jun 2026.
Builds on
10 of 36 references.
References · 10
- 2019Sentence-BERT: Sentence Embeddings using Siamese BERT-Networkscited by 9,170
- 2019BART: Denoising Sequence-to-Sequence Pre-training for Natural Language Generation, Translation, and Comprehensioncited by 5,893
- 2018UMAP: Uniform Manifold Approximation and Projection for Dimension Reductioncited by 2,898
- 2024MARE: Multi-Agents Collaboration Framework for Requirements Engineeringcited by 28
- 2024Abstractive Text Summarization: State of the Art, Challenges, and Improvementscited by 17
- 2025Large Language Models (LLMs) for Requirements Engineering (RE): A Systematic Literature Reviewcited by 9
- 2025Automating a Complete Software Test Process Using LLMs: An Automotive Case Studycited by 8
- 2024Automated Control Logic Test Case Generation using Large Language Modelscited by 6
- 2025Generating High-Level Test Cases from Requirements using LLM: An Industry Studycited by 3
- 2025RepoSummary: Feature-Oriented Summarization and Documentation Generation for Code Repositoriescited by 3
Built on by
Not cited yet.
Similar, not cited
Close in wording, no citation either way
- 2024Engineering Safety Requirements for Autonomous Driving with Large Language Models
- 2024Generating Test Scenarios from NL Requirements using Retrieval-Augmented LLMs: An Industrial Study
- 2024Leveraging Graph-RAG and Prompt Engineering to Enhance LLM-Based Automated Requirement Traceability and Compliance Checks
- 2025Are requirements really all you need? A case study of LLM-driven configuration code generation for automotive simulations
- 2026Class Model Generation from Requirements using Large Language Models ↗
- 2025TVR: Automotive System Requirement Traceability Validation and Recovery Through Retrieval-Augmented Generation
- 2025Smarter, not Bigger: Fine-Tuned RAG-Enhanced LLMs for Automotive HIL Testing
- 2026Two Truths and A Lie? Benchmarking Off-the-Shelf LLMs for Requirements Quality Assessment: Performance, False Alarms, and Misses ↗