Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 cited by

TestForge: Feedback-Driven, Agentic Test Suite Generation

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

arxiv 2503.14713 v1 pith:TANBMCUP submitted 2025-03-18 cs.SE

classification cs.SE
keywords testtestforgegenerationllm-basedagentictechniquestestsapproaches
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

0 comments
abstract

Automated test generation holds great promise for alleviating the burdens of manual test creation. However, existing search-based techniques compromise on test readability, while LLM-based approaches are prohibitively expensive in practice. We present TestForge, an agentic unit testing framework designed to cost-effectively generate high-quality test suites for real-world code. Our key insight is to reframe LLM-based test generation as an iterative process. TestForge thus begins with tests generated via zero-shot prompting, and then continuously refines those tests based on feedback from test executions and coverage reports. We evaluate TestForge on TestGenEval, a real world unit test generation benchmark sourced from 11 large scale open source repositories; we show that TestForge achieves a pass@1 rate of 84.3%, 44.4% line coverage and 33.8% mutation score on average, outperforming prior classical approaches and a one-iteration LLM-based baseline. TestForge produces more natural and understandable tests compared to state-of-the-art search-based techniques, and offers substantial cost savings over LLM-based techniques (at $0.63 per file). Finally, we release a version of TestGenEval integrated with the OpenHands platform, a popular open-source framework featuring a diverse set of software engineering agents and agentic benchmarks, for future extension and development.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 3 Pith papers

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. A Mechanistic Lens on Semantic Conflicts: Using Activation Patching to Understand LLM Behavior

    cs.SE 2026-07 conditional novelty 7.0 of 10

    Semantic conflicts between code and cues cut execution-grounded correctness; residual-stream patching localizes the causal signal to the edit site, sparse carriers, and readout.

  2. Evaluating and Mitigating the Misguidance Effect of Buggy Code in LLM-Generated Unit Tests

    cs.SE 2026-07 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    Buggy code in prompts steers LLMs to write tests that validate the bug, and generating tests from an LLM-written spec docstring instead of the code reduces such misguided tests and increases bug-finding ones.

  3. Adversarial Test-Hardening for AI-Written Code: An Instrument Autopsy and a Pre-Registered Causal Estimate of the Critic Loop

    cs.SE 2026-07 accept novelty 5.0 of 10

    A frozen-seed experiment measures the critic loop's incremental kill rate at 0.783 (95% CI [0.592, 0.935]), and traces a prior p=9.5e-66 cross-provider effect to a silent output cap.

Pith tools