REVIEW 1 cited by
Can LLMs Generate High-Quality Test Cases for Algorithm Problems? TestCase-Eval: A Systematic Evaluation of Fault Coverage and Exposure
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
Can LLMs Generate High-Quality Test Cases for Algorithm Problems? TestCase-Eval: A Systematic Evaluation of Fault Coverage and Exposure
read the original abstract
We introduce TestCase-Eval, a new benchmark for systematic evaluation of LLMs in test-case generation. TestCase-Eval includes 500 algorithm problems and 100,000 human-crafted solutions from the Codeforces platform. It focuses on two pivotal tasks: (1) Fault Coverage, which measures how well LLM-generated test sets probe diverse input scenarios and cover a wide range of potential failure modes. (2) Fault Exposure, which evaluates whether LLMs can craft a tailored test input that reveals a specific incorrect code implementation. We provide a comprehensive assessment of 19 state-of-the-art open-source and proprietary LLMs on TestCase-Eval, offering insights into their strengths and limitations in generating effective test cases for algorithm problems.
Forward citations
Cited by 1 Pith paper
-
Coding Agents as Test-Suite Auditors: Finding What Official Suites Miss While Approaching What They Catch
A target-blind agent-generated test suite with a consensus-and-validator certification chain found 906 verified accepted-but-buggy submissions on AtCoder and led all baselines on post-cutoff Codeforces problems.
discussion (0)
Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.