FaultLens: Learning Compact Behavioral Test Suites for Generated Operational Programs
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Generated operational programs are often validated with either a few hand-written examples or exhaustive regression suites. The former can miss sparse boundary and interaction faults, while the latter can be unnecessarily expensive. We introduce FaultLens, a method for learning compact behavioral test suites while preserving an auditable connection to executed evidence. It executes a rich probe domain once, stores the fault-probe kill relation as a sparse outcome cache, and learns probe orderings only from earlier program generations. A fault-driven greedy component exploits known kill structure, while a mutation-independent diversity component covers probe families, cases, templates, and temporal bins. Their alternating hybrid remains useful when a new program contains a fault mechanism absent from ordering construction. We evaluate twenty generated operational policies across four environments, ten execution seeds, 1,200 measured run summaries, 2,160 controlled program transformations, and 4,120,200 executed program-probe pairs. Of 1,960 intended faulty transformations, 1,779 alter a contract or output somewhere in the finite audit domain; 200 additional controls preserve behavior. A 32-probe hybrid learned on generations 1-3 covers 576/582 (99.0%) dynamically killable faults in generations 4-5 using 1.2-2.0% of the exhaustive domain. With an entire fault family withheld from training, diversity raises scenario-family macro coverage from 84.6% to 94.9%. In a downstream deployment study, a conservative admission rule reduces severe tail regressions from 15/20 program-environment groups to 0/20. FaultLens provides a prioritized evidence mechanism, not a proof of correctness, and makes its budget, evidence source, generalization split, and misses explicit.
Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 8 of its 18 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 27 Aug 2026.
Builds on
8 of 18 references.
References · 8
- 2023SWE-bench: Can Language Models Resolve Real-World GitHub Issues?cited by 3,373
- 2020Beyond Accuracy: Behavioral Testing of NLP models with CheckListcited by 1,006
- 2022Conformal Risk Controlcited by 299
- 2020Metamorphic Testing: A New Approach for Generating Next Test Casescited by 75
- 2020Bao: Learning to Steer Query Optimizerscited by 62
- 2026SWIFT: Prompt-Adaptive Memory for Efficient Interactive Long Video Generationcited by 3
- 2026Enhancing Video Physical Consistency via Role-aware Joint Training and Modality-decoupled Denoisingcited by 3
- 2026Scale-Separated Conditioning for Style-Encoder-Free Diffusion Stylizationcited by 2
Built on by
Not cited yet.