Search

In the domain of code generation, self-debugging is crucial. It allows LLMs to refine their generated code based on execution feedback. This is particularly important because generating correct solutions in one attempt proves challenging for complex tasks. Prior works on self-debugging mostly focus on prompting methods by providing LLMs with few-shot examples, which work poorly on small open-sourced LLMs. In this work, we propose a training framework that significantly improves self-debugging capability of LLMs. Intuitively, we observe that a chain of explanations on the wrong code followed by code refinement helps LLMs better analyze the wrong code and do refinement. We thus propose an automated pipeline to collect a high-quality dataset for code explanation and refinement by generating a number of explanations and refinement trajectories and filtering via execution verification. We perform supervised fine-tuning (SFT) and further reinforcement learning (RL) on both success and failure trajectories with a novel reward design considering code explanation and refinement quality. SFT improves the pass@1 by up to 15.92% and pass@10 by 9.30% over four benchmarks. RL training brings additional up to 3.54% improvement on pass@1 and 2.55% improvement on pass@10. The trained LLMs show iterative refinement ability, and can keep refining code continuously. Lastly, our human evaluation shows that the LLMs trained with our framework generate more useful code explanations and help developers better understand bugs in source code.

Test oracles play a crucial role in software testing, enabling effective bug detection. Despite initial promise, neural-based methods for automated test oracle generation often result in a large number of false positives and weaker test oracles. While LLMs have demonstrated impressive effectiveness in various software engineering tasks, including code generation, test case creation, and bug fixing, there remains a notable absence of large-scale studies exploring their effectiveness in test oracle generation. The question of whether LLMs can address the challenges in effective oracle generation is both compelling and requires thorough investigation. In this research, we present the first comprehensive study to investigate the capabilities of LLMs in generating correct, diverse, and strong test oracles capable of effectively identifying a large number of unique bugs. To this end, we fine-tuned seven code LLMs using six distinct prompts on the SF110 dataset. Utilizing the most effective fine-tuned LLM and prompt pair, we introduce TOGLL, a novel LLM-based method for test oracle generation. To investigate the generalizability of TOGLL, we conduct studies on 25 large-scale Java projects. Besides assessing the correctness, we also assess the diversity and strength of the generated oracles. We compare the results against EvoSuite and the state-of-the-art neural method, TOGA. Our findings reveal that TOGLL can produce 3.8 times more correct assertion oracles and 4.9 times more exception oracles. Moreover, our findings demonstrate that TOGLL is capable of generating significantly diverse test oracles. It can detect 1,023 unique bugs that EvoSuite cannot, which is ten times more than what the previous SOTA neural-based method, TOGA, can detect.

Large language models (LLMs) have shown impressive effectiveness in various software engineering tasks, including automated program repair (APR). In this study, we take a deep dive into automated bug fixing utilizing LLMs. In contrast to many deep learning-based APR methods that assume known bug locations, rely on line-level localization tools, or address bug prediction and fixing in one step, our approach uniquely employs LLMs to predict bug location at the token level and subsequently utilizes them for bug fixing. This methodological separation of bug localization and fixing using different LLMs enables effective integration of diverse contextual information and improved incorporation of inductive biases. We introduce Toggle: Token-Granulated Bug Localization and Repair, a comprehensive program repair framework that integrates a bug localization model, an adjustment unit, and a bug-fixing model. Toggle takes a buggy function as input and generates a complete corrected function. We investigate various styles of prompting to the bug fixing model to identify the most effective prompts that better utilize the inductive bias and significantly outperform others. Toggle achieves the new state-of-the-art (SOTA) performance on the CodeXGLUE code refinement benchmark, and exhibits better and comparable performance on several other widely-used APR datasets, including Defects4J.

The artifact used for evaluating the experimental results of Measuring and Mitigating Gaps in Structural Testing is publicly available on GitHub, Software Heritage and figshare, and is reusable. The artifact consists of necessary data, tools, scripts, and detailed documentation for running the experiments and reproducing the results shown in the paper. We have also provided a VirtualBox VM image allowing users to quickly setup and reproduce the results. Users are expected to be familiar using the VirtualBox software and Linux platform for evaluating or reusing the artifact.

Defining test oracles is crucial and central to test development, but manual construction of oracles is expensive. While recent neural-based automated test oracle generation techniques have shown promise, their real-world effectiveness remains a compelling question requiring further exploration and understanding. This paper investigates the effectiveness of TOGA, a recently developed neural-based method for automatic test oracle generation by Dinella et al. TOGA utilizes EvoSuite-generated test inputs and generates both exception and assertion oracles. In a Defects4j study, TOGA outperformed specification, search, and neural-based techniques, detecting 57 bugs, including 30 unique bugs not detected by other methods. To gain a deeper understanding of its applicability in real-world settings, we conducted a series of external, extended, and conceptual replication studies of TOGA. In a large-scale study involving 25 real-world Java systems, 223.5K test cases, and 51K injected faults, we evaluate TOGA's ability to improve fault-detection effectiveness relative to the state-of-the-practice and the state-of-the-art. We find that TOGA misclassifies the type of oracle needed 24% of the time and that when it classifies correctly around 62% of the time it is not confident enough to generate any assertion oracle. When it does generate an assertion oracle, more than 47% of them are false positives, and the true positive assertions only increase fault detection by 0.3% relative to prior work. These findings expose limitations of the state-of-the-art neural-based oracle generation technique, provide valuable insights for improvement, and offer lessons for evaluating future automated oracle generation methods.

Code coverage is a popular and widespread test adequacy metric that measures the percentage of program codes executed by a test suite. Despite its popularity, code coverage has several limitations. One of the major limitations is that it does not provide any insights into the quality or quantity of test oracles, a core component of testing. Due to this limitation, several studies have suggested that coverage is a poor test adequacy metric; therefore, it should not be used as an indicator of a test suite's fault detection effectiveness. To address this limitation, researchers have proposed extensions to traditional structural code coverage to explicitly consider the quality of test oracles. We refer to these extensions as oracle-based code coverage. This survey paper studies oracle-based coverage techniques published since their inception in 2007. We discuss each metric's definition, methodology, experimental studies, and research findings. Even though oracle-based coverage metrics are proven to be more effective than traditional coverage in detecting faults, they have received little attention in the software engineering community. We present all existing oracle-based adequacy metrics in this paper and compare the critical features against each other. We observe that different oracle-based adequacy metrics operate on different coverage domains and use diverse underlying analysis techniques, enabling a software tester to choose the appropriate metric based on the testing requirements. Our paper provides valuable information regarding the limitations of oracle-based methods, addressing which may help their broader adoption in software testing automation., Comment: 7 pages