Papers › Automatic High-Level Test Case Generation using Large Language Models
Automatic High-Level Test Case Generation using Large Language Models
Navid Bin Hasan, Md. Ashraful Islam, Junaed Younus Khan, Sanjida Senjik, Anindya Iqbal
The archive published only this paper's code-link row. Authors, date and abstract are from arXiv's metadata (CC0), read from the Kaggle arXiv metadata snapshot of 2026-09-12 where its title matched the archive's; the title is the archive's.
We explored the challenges practitioners face in software testing and proposed automated solutions to address these obstacles. We began with a survey of local software companies and 26 practitioners, revealing that the primary challenge is not writing test scripts but aligning testing efforts with business requirements. Based on these insights, we constructed a use-case → (high-level) test-cases dataset to train/fine-tune models for generating high-level test cases. High-level test cases specify what aspects of the software's functionality need to be tested, along with the expected outcomes. We evaluated large language models, such as GPT-4o, Gemini, LLaMA 3.1 8B, and Mistral 7B, where fine-tuning (the latter two) yields improved performance. A final (human evaluation) survey confirmed the effectiveness of these generated test cases. Our proactive approach strengthens requirement-testing alignment and facilitates early test case generation to streamline development.
In Syntology Open this paper in Syntology's Atlas, the map of the papers in Syntology's graph and their citations.
Code
Repository list and official/mentioned flags are the archive's, frozen 2025-07-28. Reachability, where shown, is from one Syntology probe window (2026-09-16 to 2026-09-18); repositories not probed show nothing. GitHub stars are not tracked.
Code Syntology ran Syntology
Not run by Syntology. Nothing on this page verifies that the listed code works.
Results from the paper archive 2025-07-28
No leaderboard rows for this paper in the archive.
Report a problem or propose a change · a person checks every report against the paper or source before anything changes; decisions are listed on /corrections