arXiv Science⌕ Search

arXiv · 2610.02928

Discriminating Fixture Coverage in Agent-Infrastructure Verification Suites

Abstract

Invariant suites and runtime monitors increasingly gate agent deployment decisions, and the evidence offered for any particular suite is almost always a single observation: it passes an implementation believed correct and fails one believed broken. We measure what that observation is worth. Applying mutation analysis to an invariant suite for a multi-session agent state-projection layer, we first find that this standard validation certifies a suite in which a first-order mutant removing event-identity deduplication survives every check. We then freeze the repaired twelve-check suite, record its hash, and run it once against ten mutants specified by an adversarial reader who designed none of its fixtures: it kills five. Instrumenting the five survivors against the reference shows they fail in two distinct ways, not one. Three are never activated, because no fixture supplies an input on which the mutated code behaves differently at all. The other two corrupt internal state that no oracle in the suite can observe. The two modes need different repairs, and neither is visible from a pass/fail report. Treating the missing inputs as a coverage question, we enumerate seven discriminating dimensions of the input space, register in advance which are uncovered and which survivors they should explain, and add one fixture per uncovered dimension while reusing the existing oracles verbatim. All five survivors then die, each to the check written for its predicted dimension. We report this as a repair result on the same challenge set rather than a second held-out estimate, and give the artifact, including the frozen hash, the registered predictions, all mutants and the run logs, so the distinction is checkable.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Xin Xu, Siru Tao. 2026-10-02. Discriminating Fixture Coverage in Agent-Infrastructure Verification Suites. https://arxiv.org/abs/2610.02928

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

LogLLM: Log-based Anomaly Detection Using Large Language Models

Software systems often record important runtime information in logs to help with troubleshooting. Log-based anomaly detection has become a key research area that aims to identify system issues through log data, ultimately enhancing the reliability of software systems. Existing methods often fall short in capturing the semantic information, typically expressed in natural language, or the sequential dependencies inherent in log sequences. In this paper, we propose LogLLM, a framework that enables collaboration between heterogeneous LLMs for log-based anomaly detection. LogLLM exploits the complementary capabilities of different LLM architectures: a Transformer encoder-based LLM is employed to extract fine-grained semantic vectors from individual log messages, while a Transformer decoder-based LLM is utilized to model sequential dependencies and generate anomaly detection decisions. To enable effective collaboration between these heterogeneous LLMs, we introduce a learnable projector to align their vector representation spaces. Furthermore, we design a progressive three-stage training strategy to optimize the collaboration between heterogeneous LLMs by gradually aligning their representations and adapting them to log anomaly detection. Unlike conventional methods that require log parsers to extract templates, LogLLM preprocesses log messages with regular expressions, streamlining the entire process. Experimental results on four public real-world datasets demonstrate that LogLLM outperforms state-of-the-art methods, achieving an average F$_1$-score improvement of 6.6% over the strongest existing approach. Further analyses provide insights into the effectiveness of the key components of the model architecture and progressive three-stage training strategy.

cs.SE↗

The EmpathiSEr: Development and Validation of Software Engineering Oriented Empathy Scales

Empathy plays a critical role in software engineering (SE), for instance in situations where developers interpret non-technical users' frustration with system usability or where product owners account for the technical constraints experienced by engineers during implementation. Such interactions shape collaboration, communication, and user-centred design outcomes. Although SE research has increasingly recognised empathy as a key human aspect, there remains no validated instrument specifically designed to measure it within the unique socio-technical contexts of SE. Existing generic empathy scales, while well-established in psychology and healthcare, often rely on language, scenarios, and assumptions that are not meaningful or interpretable for software practitioners. These scales fail to account for the diverse, role-specific, and domain-bound expressions of empathy in SE, such as understanding a non-technical user's frustrations or another practitioner's technical constraints, which differ substantially from empathy in clinical or everyday contexts. To address this gap, we developed and validated two domain-specific empathy scales: EmpathiSEr-P, assessing empathy among practitioners, and EmpathiSEr-U, capturing practitioner empathy towards users. Grounded in a practitioner-informed conceptual framework, the scales encompass three dimensions of empathy: cognitive empathy, affective empathy, and empathic responses. We followed a rigorous, multi-phase methodology, including expert evaluation, cognitive interviews, and two practitioner surveys. The resulting instruments represent the first psychometrically validated empathy scales tailored to SE, offering researchers and practitioners a tool for assessing empathy and designing empathy-enhancing interventions in software teams and user interactions.

cs.SE↗

Verify Before You Fix: Agentic Execution Grounding for Trustworthy Cross-Language Code Analysis

Learned classifiers deployed in agentic pipelines face a fundamental reliability problem: predictions are probabilistic inferences, not verified conclusions, and acting on them without grounding in observable evidence leads to compounding failures across downstream stages. Software vulnerability analysis makes this cost concrete and measurable. We address this through a unified cross-language vulnerability lifecycle framework built around three LLM-driven reasoning stages-hybrid structural-semantic detection, execution-grounded agentic validation, and validation-aware iterative repair-governed by a strict invariant: no repair action is taken without execution-based confirmation of exploitability. Cross-language generalization is achieved via a Universal Abstract Syntax Tree (uAST) normalizing Java, Python, and C++ into a shared structural schema, combined with a hybrid fusion of GraphSAGE and Qwen2.5-Coder-1.5B embeddings through learned two-way gating, whose per-sample weights provide intrinsic explainability at no additional cost. The framework achieves 89.84-92.02% intra-language detection accuracy and 74.43-80.12% zero-shot cross-language F1, resolving 69.74% of vulnerabilities end-to-end at a 12.27% total failure rate. Ablations establish necessity: removing uAST degrades cross-language F1 by 23.42%, while disabling validation increases unnecessary repairs by 131.7%. These results demonstrate that execution-grounded closed-loop reasoning is a principled and practically deployable mechanism for trustworthy LLM-driven agentic AI.

cs.SE↗