Unify and Triumph: Polyglot, Diverse, and Self-Consistent Generation of Unit Tests with LLMs

Large language model (LLM)-based test generation has gained attention in software engineering, yet most studies evaluate LLMs' ability to generate unit tests in a single attempt for a given language, missing the opportunity to leverage LLM diversity for more robust testing. This paper introduces PolyTest, a novel approach that enhances test generation by exploiting polyglot and temperature-controlled diversity. PolyTest systematically leverages these properties in two complementary ways: (1) Cross-lingual test generation, where tests are generated in multiple languages at zero temperature and then unified; (2) Diverse test sampling, where multiple test sets are generated within the same language at a higher temperature before unification. A key insight is that LLMs can generate diverse yet contradicting tests -- same input, different expected outputs -- across languages and generations. PolyTest mitigates inconsistencies by unifying test sets, fostering self-consistency and improving overall test quality. Unlike single-language or single-attempt approaches, PolyTest enhances testing without requiring on-the-fly execution, making it particularly beneficial for weaker-performing languages. We evaluate PolyTest on Llama3-70B, GPT-4o, and GPT-3.5 using EvalPlus, generating tests in five languages (Java, C, Python, JavaScript, and a CSV-based format) at temperature 0 and sampling multiple sets at temperature 1. We observe that LLMs frequently generate contradicting tests across settings, and that PolyTest significantly improves test quality across all considered metrics -- number of tests, passing rate, statement/branch coverage (up to +9.01%), and mutation score (up to +11.23%). Finally, PolyTest outperforms Pynguin in test generation, passing rate, and mutation score.

Piloting Copilot and Codex: Hot Temperature, Cold Prompts, or Black Magic?

Language models are promising solutions for tackling increasing complex problems. In software engineering, they recently attracted attention in code assistants, with programs automatically written in a given programming language from a programming task description in natural language. They have the potential to save time and effort when writing code. However, these systems are currently poorly understood, preventing them from being used optimally. In this paper, we investigate the various input parameters of two language models, and conduct a study to understand if variations of these input parameters (e.g. programming task description and the surrounding context, creativity of the language model, number of generated solutions) can have a significant impact on the quality of the generated programs. We design specific operators for varying input parameters and apply them over two code assistants (Copilot and Codex) and two benchmarks representing algorithmic problems (HumanEval and LeetCode). Our results showed that varying the input parameters can significantly improve the performance of language models. However, there is a tight dependency when varying the temperature, the prompt and the number of generated solutions, making potentially hard for developers to properly control the parameters to obtain an optimal result. This work opens opportunities to propose (automated) strategies for improving performance.