Scribd
Upload
11 views3 pages

Requirement Document For Implementation of Bug Report-Based Test Input Extraction and Test Case Gene...

This document outlines a plan to implement a new approach for test input extraction and test case generation using Large Language Models (LLMs), inspired by the BRMINER technique. The implementation involves four phases: replicating BRMINER, preparing a dataset for LLM training, fine-tuning the LLM, and generating test cases with the LLM. The goal is to enhance adaptability, precision, and bug detection capabilities compared to the existing BRMINER method.

Uploaded by

ogutuisaiah1
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
11 views3 pages

Requirement Document For Implementation of Bug Report-Based Test Input Extraction and Test Case Gene...

This document outlines a plan to implement a new approach for test input extraction and test case generation using Large Language Models (LLMs), inspired by the BRMINER technique. The implementation involves four phases: replicating BRMINER, preparing a dataset for LLM training, fine-tuning the LLM, and generating test cases with the LLM. The goal is to enhance adaptability, precision, and bug detection capabilities compared to the existing BRMINER method.

Uploaded by

ogutuisaiah1
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 3

Requirement Document for Implementation of Bug

Report-Based Test Input Extraction and Test Case


Generation Using Large Language Models (LLMs)

Introduction

This document provides a detailed plan for implementing a novel approach to enhance test
input extraction and test case generation. Inspired by the BRMINER technique, the goal is to
leverage Large Language Models (LLMs) for the same task. The workflow involves replicating
BRMINER results and then transitioning to an LLM-based approach.

Existing Approach

BRMINER Overview

1. Purpose: BRMINER extracts relevant test inputs from bug reports and utilizes them to
generate automated test cases using EvoSuite.
2. Methodology:
○ Parses bug reports for structured and unstructured data.
○ Uses regular expressions and Java code parsing to extract literals and potential
test inputs.
○ Inputs are fed into EvoSuite to generate test cases, evaluated using the
Defects4J dataset.
3. Performance: Achieves 68.68% relevant input extraction using regular expressions and
detects 45 previously undetected bugs.

Limitations

● Dependency on regex reduces precision.


● Limited adaptability to diverse bug report formats.
● Fixed extraction rules lack contextual understanding, often requiring manual tuning.

New Approach

Objective

Develop a more adaptable and context-aware system by leveraging a fine-tuned LLM to:
1. Extract test inputs directly from structured and unstructured data in bug reports.
2. Generate precise and relevant test cases using the same dataset.
3. Enhance coverage and bug detection capabilities compared to BRMINER.

Implementation Plan

Phase 1: Replicating BRMINER

1. Implement BRMINER as described in the paper using the Defects4J dataset.


2. Tasks:
○ Extract bug reports and inputs using BRMINER's regex and Java parsing
methodology.
○ Generate test cases using EvoSuite.
○ Validate results against reported metrics (coverage, bug detection).
3. Expected Outcomes:
○ Establish baseline metrics.
○ Understand strengths and weaknesses of the BRMINER approach.

Phase 2: Dataset Preparation for LLM

1. Collect Data:
○ Bug reports (structured and unstructured formats).
○ Source code with and without bugs (Defects4J dataset).
○ Test cases and corresponding bug fixes.
2. Preprocess Data:
○ Normalize bug reports into a uniform format (remove noise, segment text).
○ Annotate inputs and outputs to train the LLM on extraction tasks.
3. Output:
○ A clean, structured dataset ready for LLM training.

Phase 3: Fine-Tuning the LLM

1. Use an open-source LLM (e.g., GPT or similar) as the base model.


2. Fine-tune the model:
○ Inputs: Preprocessed bug reports.
○ Outputs: Relevant test inputs and test case templates.
3. Train the model iteratively with evaluation metrics (e.g., precision, recall for test input
relevance).

Phase 4: LLM-Based Test Case Generation

1. Integrate the fine-tuned LLM:


○ Extract inputs from bug reports.
○ Generate test cases using EvoSuite with LLM-extracted inputs.
2. Evaluate against the baseline (BRMINER results):
○ Compare test input relevance.
○ Analyze bug detection improvements.
○ Measure test coverage enhancements.

Deliverables

1. Phase 1: Reproduced BRMINER results, including metrics for validation.


2. Phase 2: A structured dataset combining bug reports, source code, and test cases.
3. Phase 3: Fine-tuned LLM model capable of extracting test inputs.
4. Phase 4: Comparative analysis of BRMINER and LLM-based test case generation.

Key Tools and Technologies

1. For BRMINER:
○ EvoSuite for test case generation.
○ Java parsers and regex for data extraction.
2. For LLM Development:
○ Open-source LLMs (LLAMA).
○ Machine learning frameworks (PyTorch, TensorFlow).
○ Tools for fine-tuning and evaluation.

Timeline

1. Phase 1: 3 weeks (replication and validation).


2. Phase 2: 4 weeks (data collection and preprocessing).
3. Phase 3: 6 weeks (fine-tuning and testing).
4. Phase 4: 3 weeks (integration and comparison).

Evaluation Metrics

1. Relevance of Test Inputs: Measure precision and recall.


2. Bug Detection: Compare number of detected bugs.
3. Code Coverage: Evaluate instruction, branch, and line coverage.
4. Efficiency: Analyze runtime and computational resources.

You might also like