A new benchmark scores LLMs' tendency to generate code smells by aggregating token-level probabilities over smell locations in existing code.
Evaluating Large Language Models in Detecting Test Smells
1 Pith paper cite this work. Polarity classification is still indexing.
abstract
Test smells are coding issues that typically arise from inadequate practices, a lack of knowledge about effective testing, or deadline pressures to complete projects. The presence of test smells can negatively impact the maintainability and reliability of software. While there are tools that use advanced static analysis or machine learning techniques to detect test smells, these tools often require effort to be used. This study aims to evaluate the capability of Large Language Models (LLMs) in automatically detecting test smells. We evaluated ChatGPT-4, Mistral Large, and Gemini Advanced using 30 types of test smells across codebases in seven different programming languages collected from the literature. ChatGPT-4 identified 21 types of test smells. Gemini Advanced identified 17 types, while Mistral Large detected 15 types of test smells. Conclusion: The LLMs demonstrated potential as a valuable tool in identifying test smells.
citation-role summary
citation-polarity summary
fields
cs.SE 1years
2024 1verdicts
REJECT 1roles
background 1polarities
unclear 1representative citing papers
citing papers explorer
-
How Propense Are Large Language Models at Producing Code Smells? A Benchmarking Study
A new benchmark scores LLMs' tendency to generate code smells by aggregating token-level probabilities over smell locations in existing code.