E-Test: E'er-Improving Test Suites
Ketai Qiu, Luca Di Grazia, Leonardo Mariani, Mauro Pezzè
Abstract
Test suites are inherently imperfect, and testers can always enrich a suite with new test cases that improve its quality and, consequently, the reliability of the target software system. However, finding test cases that explore execution scenarios beyond the scope of an existing suite can be extremely challenging and labor-intensive, particularly when managing large test suites over extended periods.
In this paper, we propose E-Test, an approach that reduces the gap between the execution space explored with a test suite and the executions experienced after testing by augmenting the test suite with test cases that explore execution scenarios that emerge in production. E-Test (i) identifies executions that have not yet been tested from large sets of scenarios, such as those monitored during intensive production usage, and (ii) generates new test cases that enhance the test suite. E-Test leverages Large Language Models (LLMs) to pinpoint scenarios that the current test suite does not adequately cover, and augments the suite with test cases that execute these scenarios.
Our evaluation on a dataset of 1,975 scenarios, collected from highly-starred open-source Java projects already in production and Defects4J, demonstrates that E-Test retrieves not-yet-tested execution scenarios significantly better than state-of-the-art approaches. While existing regression testing and field testing approaches for this task achieve a maximum F1-score of 0.34, and vanilla LLMs achieve a maximum F1-score of 0.39, E-Test reaches 0.55.
These results highlight the impact of E-Test in enhancing test suites by effectively targeting not-yet-tested execution scenarios and reducing manual effort required for maintaining test suites.
• Software and its engineering → Software testing and debugging.
Ask about this paper
Your agent reads all of it.
Lune indexed this paper to the last equation, along with the top-tier papers that cite it. Ask a question and the answer quotes them.
Your agent calls
Luneget_paper_fulltext
Free to start. No credit card required.
Terminal
Install the CLIlune papers fulltext acae6ecf-c4a7-49fb-888e-ba66620a839eBuilds on16
- Language Models are Few-Shot LearnersTom B. Brown, Benjamin Mann, Nick Ryder, Melanie Subbiah et al.NeurIPS 2020 · 64,255 citations
- Retrieval-Augmented Generation for Knowledge-Intensive NLP TasksPatrick Lewis, Ethan Perez, Aleksandra Piktus, Fabio Petroni et al.NeurIPS 2020 · 19,162 citations
- Large Language Models are Few-shot Testers: Exploring LLM-based General Bug ReproductionSungmin Kang, Juyeon Yoon, Shin YooICSE 2023 · 163 citations
- Can Large Language Models Reason about Program Invariants?Kexin Pei, David Bieber, Kensen Shi, Charles Sutton et al.ICML 2023 · 128 citations
- FlakeFlagger: Predicting Flakiness Without Rerunning TestsAbdulrahman Alshammari, Christopher Morris, Michael Hilton, Jonathan BellICSE 2021 · 63 citations
Related papers
- Test Intention Guided LLM-Based Unit Test GenerationZifan Nan, Zhaoqiang Guo, Kui Liu, Xin XiaICSE 2025 · 5 citations
- You Name It, I Run It: An LLM Agent to Execute Tests of Arbitrary ProjectsIslem Bouzenia, Michael PradelISSTA 2025 · 17 citations
- Knowledge Matters: Injecting Project and Testing Knowledge into LLM-based Unit Test GenerationAnji Li, Mingwei Liu, Zhenxi Chen, Zheng Pei et al.ICSE 2026 · 2 citations
- Do LLMs Generate Useful Test Oracles? An Empirical Study with an Unbiased DatasetDavide Molinelli, Luca Di Grazia, Alberto Martin-Lopez, Michael D. Ernst et al.ASE 2025 · 3 citations
- HITS: High-coverage LLM-based Unit Test Generation via Method SlicingZejun Wang, Kaibo Liu, Ge Li, Zhi JinASE 2024 · 29 citations
