Papers › Improving Deep Assertion Generation via Fine-Tuning Retrieval-Augmented Pre-trained...
Improving Deep Assertion Generation via Fine-Tuning Retrieval-Augmented Pre-trained Language Models
Quanjun Zhang, Chunrong Fang, Yi Zheng, Yaxin Zhang, Yuan Zhao, Rubing Huang, Jianyi Zhou, Yun Yang, Tao Zheng, Zhenyu Chen
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.
Unit testing validates the correctness of the units of the software system under test and serves as the cornerstone in improving software quality and reliability. To reduce manual efforts in writing unit tests, some techniques have been proposed to automatically generate test assertions, with recent integration-based approaches considered state-of-the-art. Despite being promising, such integration-based approaches face several limitations, including reliance on lexical matching for assertion retrieval and a limited training corpus for assertion generation. This paper proposes a novel retrieval-augmented deep assertion generation approach, namely RetriGen, based on a hybrid retriever and a pre-trained language model (PLM)-based generator. Given a focal-test, RetriGen first builds a hybrid assertion retriever to search for the most relevant Test-Assert Pair from external codebases. The retrieval process considers lexical similarity and semantical similarity via a token-based and an embedding-based retriever, respectively. RetriGen then treats assertion generation as a sequence-to-sequence task and designs a PLM-based assertion generator to predict a correct assertion. We conduct extensive experiments to evaluate RetriGen against six state-of-the-art approaches across two large-scale datasets and two metrics. The results demonstrate that RetriGen achieves 57.66% accuracy and 73.24% CodeBLEU, outperforming all baselines with average improvements of 50.66% and 14.14%, respectively.
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