Papers › Automatic Test-Case Reduction in Proof Assistants: A Case Study in Coq
Automatic Test-Case Reduction in Proof Assistants: A Case Study in Coq
Jason Gross, Théo Zimmermann, Rajashree Agrawal, Adam Chlipala
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.
As the adoption of proof assistants increases, there is a need for efficiency in identifying, documenting, and fixing compatibility issues that arise from proof assistant evolution. We present the Coq Bug Minimizer, a tool for reproducing buggy behavior with minimal and standalone files, integrated with coqbot to trigger automatically on Coq reverse CI failures. Our tool eliminates the overhead of having to download, set up, compile, and then explore and understand large developments: enabling Coq developers to easily obtain modular test-case files for fast experimentation. In this paper, we describe insights about how test-case reduction is different in Coq than in traditional compilers. We expect that our insights will generalize to other proof assistants. We evaluate the Coq Bug Minimizer on over 150 CI failures. Our tool succeeds in reducing failures to smaller test cases in roughly 75% of the time. The minimizer produces a fully standalone test case 89% of the time, and it is on average about one-third the size of the original test. The average reduced test case compiles in 1.25 seconds, with 75% taking under half a second.
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