-
Test Oracle Automation in the era of LLMs
Authors:
Facundo Molina,
Alessandra Gorla
Abstract:
The effectiveness of a test suite in detecting faults highly depends on the correctness and completeness of its test oracles. Large Language Models (LLMs) have already demonstrated remarkable proficiency in tackling diverse software testing tasks, such as automated test generation and program repair. This paper aims to enable discussions on the potential of using LLMs for test oracle automation, a…
▽ More
The effectiveness of a test suite in detecting faults highly depends on the correctness and completeness of its test oracles. Large Language Models (LLMs) have already demonstrated remarkable proficiency in tackling diverse software testing tasks, such as automated test generation and program repair. This paper aims to enable discussions on the potential of using LLMs for test oracle automation, along with the challenges that may emerge during the generation of various types of oracles. Additionally, our aim is to initiate discussions on the primary threats that SE researchers must consider when employing LLMs for oracle automation, encompassing concerns regarding oracle deficiencies and data leakages.
△ Less
Submitted 21 May, 2024;
originally announced May 2024.
-
A Decade of Code Comment Quality Assessment: A Systematic Literature Review
Authors:
Pooja Rani,
Arianna Blasi,
Nataliia Stulova,
Sebastiano Panichella,
Alessandra Gorla,
Oscar Nierstrasz
Abstract:
Code comments are important artifacts in software systems and play a paramount role in many software engineering (SE) tasks related to maintenance and program comprehension. However, while it is widely accepted that high quality matters in code comments just as it matters in source code, assessing comment quality in practice is still an open problem. First and foremost, there is no unique definiti…
▽ More
Code comments are important artifacts in software systems and play a paramount role in many software engineering (SE) tasks related to maintenance and program comprehension. However, while it is widely accepted that high quality matters in code comments just as it matters in source code, assessing comment quality in practice is still an open problem. First and foremost, there is no unique definition of quality when it comes to evaluating code comments. The few existing studies on this topic rather focus on specific attributes of quality that can be easily quantified and measured. Existing techniques and corresponding tools may also focus on comments bound to a specific programming language, and may only deal with comments with specific scopes and clear goals (e.g., Javadoc comments at the method level, or in-body comments describing TODOs to be addressed). In this paper, we present a Systematic Literature Review (SLR) of the last decade of research in SE to answer the following research questions: (i) What types of comments do researchers focus on when assessing comment quality? (ii) What quality attributes (QAs) do they consider? (iii) Which tools and techniques do they use to assess comment quality?, and (iv) How do they evaluate their studies on comment quality assessment in general? Our evaluation, based on the analysis of 2353 papers and the actual review of 47 relevant ones, shows that (i) most studies and techniques focus on comments in Java code, thus may not be generalizable to other languages, and (ii) the analyzed studies focus on four main QAs of a total of 21 QAs identified in the literature, with a clear predominance of checking consistency between comments and the code. We observe that researchers rely on manual assessment and specific heuristics rather than the automated assessment of the comment quality attributes.
△ Less
Submitted 16 September, 2022;
originally announced September 2022.
-
RepliComment: Identifying Clones in Code Comments
Authors:
Arianna Blasi,
Nataliia Stulova,
Alessandra Gorla,
Oscar Nierstrasz
Abstract:
Code comments are the primary means to document implementation and facilitate program comprehension. Thus, their quality should be a primary concern to improve program maintenance. While much effort has been dedicated to detecting bad smells, such as clones in code, little work has focused on comments. In this paper we present our solution to detect clones in comments that developers should fix. R…
▽ More
Code comments are the primary means to document implementation and facilitate program comprehension. Thus, their quality should be a primary concern to improve program maintenance. While much effort has been dedicated to detecting bad smells, such as clones in code, little work has focused on comments. In this paper we present our solution to detect clones in comments that developers should fix. RepliComment can automatically analyze Java projects and report instances of copy-and-paste errors in comments, and can point developers to which comments should be fixed. Moreover, it can report when clones are signs of poorly written comments. Developers should fix these instances too in order to improve the quality of the code documentation. Our evaluation of 10 well-known open source Java projects identified over 11K instances of comment clones, and over 1,300 of them are potentially critical. We improve on our own previous work, which could only find 36 issues in the same dataset. Our manual inspection of 412 issues reported by RepliComment reveals that it achieves a precision of 79% in reporting critical comment clones. The manual inspection of 200 additional comment clones that RepliComment filters out as being legitimate, could not evince any false negative.
△ Less
Submitted 25 August, 2021;
originally announced August 2021.
-
Automated Test Input Generation for Android: Are We There Yet?
Authors:
Shauvik Roy Choudhary,
Alessandra Gorla,
Alessandro Orso
Abstract:
Mobile applications, often simply called "apps", are increasingly widespread, and we use them daily to perform a number of activities. Like all software, apps must be adequately tested to gain confidence that they behave correctly. Therefore, in recent years, researchers and practitioners alike have begun to investigate ways to automate apps testing. In particular, because of Android's open source…
▽ More
Mobile applications, often simply called "apps", are increasingly widespread, and we use them daily to perform a number of activities. Like all software, apps must be adequately tested to gain confidence that they behave correctly. Therefore, in recent years, researchers and practitioners alike have begun to investigate ways to automate apps testing. In particular, because of Android's open source nature and its large share of the market, a great deal of research has been performed on input generation techniques for apps that run on the Android operating systems. At this point in time, there are in fact a number of such techniques in the literature, which differ in the way they generate inputs, the strategy they use to explore the behavior of the app under test, and the specific heuristics they use. To better understand the strengths and weaknesses of these existing approaches, and get general insight on ways they could be made more effective, in this paper we perform a thorough comparison of the main existing test input generation tools for Android. In our comparison, we evaluate the effectiveness of these tools, and their corresponding techniques, according to four metrics: code coverage, ability to detect faults, ability to work on multiple platforms, and ease of use. Our results provide a clear picture of the state of the art in input generation for Android apps and identify future research directions that, if suitably investigated, could lead to more effective and efficient testing tools for Android.
△ Less
Submitted 31 March, 2015; v1 submitted 24 March, 2015;
originally announced March 2015.
