REVIEW 1 cited by
Improving the Readability of Automatically Generated Tests using Large Language Models
Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.
This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.
SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event
T0 review · schema-true
One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.
pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp
read the original abstract
Search-based test generators are effective at producing unit tests with high coverage. However, such automatically generated tests have no meaningful test and variable names, making them hard to understand and interpret by developers. On the other hand, large language models (LLMs) can generate highly readable test cases, but they are not able to match the effectiveness of search-based generators, in terms of achieved code coverage. In this paper, we propose to combine the effectiveness of search-based generators with the readability of LLM generated tests. Our approach focuses on improving test and variable names produced by search-based tools, while keeping their semantics (i.e., their coverage) unchanged. Our evaluation on nine industrial and open source LLMs show that our readability improvement transformations are overall semantically-preserving and stable across multiple repetitions. Moreover, a human study with ten professional developers, show that our LLM-improved tests are as readable as developer-written tests, regardless of the LLM employed.
Forward citations
Cited by 1 Pith paper
-
Rethinking Cognitive Complexity for Unit Tests: Toward a Readability-Aware Metric Grounded in Developer Perception
CCTR is a test-aware complexity metric that adds assertion, mocking, and annotation counts to the traditional nesting score, but its claim to reflect developer perception is not yet validated.
Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.