arXiv AI By Junda Zhao, Shurui Zhou, Eldan Cohen

Do Coverage and Mutation Scores of LLM-Generated Test Suites Correlate with Their Effectiveness? (Replicability Study)

Read the original on arXiv AI →

arXiv:2607. 22880v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Recent advances in large language models (LLMs) have driven growing interest in using LLMs to automate test generation.

Machine-generated by The Flow from the publisher's headline and feed description — not written or checked by a human. The full article lives at arXiv AI.

Hugging Face Trending Papers
Jul 24

Evaluating and Mitigating the Misguidance Effect of Buggy Code in LLM-Generated Unit Tests

While Large Language Models (LLMs) show great promise for automating unit test generation, recent studies suggest that the quality of generated tests can be negatively impacted when models are prompted with buggy code. This paper presents a new metric to quantitatively measure the "misguidance effect," a phenomenon where buggy code steers LLMs toward generating tests that validate its erroneous behavior rather than expose it.

arXiv AI
Jul 23

Beyond Fail-to-Pass: Iterative Hardening of Co-Generated Bug Reproduction Tests and Fixes

arXiv:2607. 19843v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) have made automated program repair (APR) increasingly practical for real-world bugs, but repairing directly from bug reports remains underconstrained.

By Yuhao Tan, Zhibang Yang, Fangkai Yang, Yuan Yao, Yu Kang, Lu Wang, Pu Zhao, Xin Zhang, Xiaoxing Ma, Qingwei Lin, Saravan Rajmohan, Dongmei Zhang