arXiv subjects

Ruixuan Ying

Publications and source records attributed to Ruixuan Ying.

8 recordsLinked to original sources

arXiv2026

Correct Tests Are Not Enough: Measuring and Training Oracle Conversion in Specification-Based Test Generation

Generating tests from a natural-language specification requires both an input that exposes faulty behavior and a correct expected output. These requirements need not improve together: a model can increase test correctness by choosing easier inputs, or discover useful inputs whose expected outputs it cannot predict. We study this interaction through executable reward decomposition and suite-level oracle-conversion measurement. Our generator jointly emits five input--output tests in one response. During training, audited reference programs provide correctness feedback, while a fixed bank of faulty programs provides two utility signals: potential input kill and effective kill after checking the generated output. An additive GRPO objective preserves both signals without requiring execution at inference time. On an audited TC-Bench split with 506 training and 142 evaluation tasks, three independently trained Qwen3.5-9B runs at step 75 increase full-test correctness from 28.59\% to 42.54\%, input kill from 24.06\% to 25.27\%, and effective full kill from 12.23\% to 14.15\%. Matched 50-step ablations reveal a trade-off: removing kill rewards yields higher correctness and slightly higher full kill, but lowers input kill to 21.60\%. A fixed-input source--oracle crossover on 64 training-pool tasks attributes the principal NoKill-to-FullKill difference to harder input selection rather than worse output prediction on identical inputs. These results identify oracle conversion as a measurable bottleneck and show the benefits and limits of preserving input-utility feedback in joint test generation.

cs.SE↗

arXiv2026

Auditing and Decomposing Feedback-Driven Evolution in LLM Test Generation under the Oracle Problem

Execution feedback is often treated as a self-verifying signal for improving LLM-generated tests. However, when generated inputs are executed on a single accepted program and its outputs are used as ground truth, invalid or underspecified inputs can create spurious fault detections and apparent evolutionary gains. We audit this failure mode in feedback-driven test generation using 142 development tasks, 114 locked external tasks, and 138 held-out tasks, with two code models, three seeds, and fault-cross-fitted real submissions. On external inputs for which three accepted implementations agree, generated outputs match the panel on only 27.79% and 50.12% of cases. A single-reference oracle inflates the measured gain from evolution by 9.46-14.85 percentage points; after auditing, equal-budget independent resampling outperforms mutation-based evolution by 6.01-18.83 points. We further compare a genuine three-round feedback loop with a density-matched placebo. External Real-Placebo differences are +0.13 and -0.50 points, while held-out differences are +1.99 and +0.28 points and do not provide robust evidence of fine-grained feedback benefit. A blinded semantic audit by two software engineering doctoral students classifies 94.41% of panel-disconfirmed inputs as invalid but 3.60% as valid, showing that panel disagreement is informative but not semantic proof. We propose an audit-and-placebo protocol that separates verifier artifacts, interaction scaffolding, and grounded feedback credit in evaluations of self-evolving test generators.

cs.SE↗

arXiv2026

Security Tests as Executable Specifications for LLM Code Generation: Benefits, Trade-offs, and Coverage Limits

Large language models (LLMs) can generate functionally useful code that remains vulnerable, while security-focused interventions may break intended behavior. We investigate security tests as executable specifications both before generation and during iterative repair. We develop SecTDD, a controlled test-feedback scaffold that separates three factors: whether tests are shown upfront, whether failed executions trigger revision, and how failures are selected and represented. The evaluation uses behavior-partitioned visible and hidden tests and byte-identical initial candidates for repair comparisons. Across 2,705 trajectories, 31 task instances, three secure-code benchmarks, 16 CWE categories, and two model families, showing all visible tests upfront increases hidden functional-and-security joint success by 19.3 percentage points on average, but improves only seven of nine benchmark-model conditions and harms two. In shared-candidate comparisons, structured feedback repairs 80 initially unsuccessful candidates with no joint regressions; fixed raw feedback repairs 83 but causes three regressions. Structured and raw feedback are otherwise nearly indistinguishable head-to-head (six wins, six losses, and 453 ties). Candidates that pass all visible tests still fail hidden behavior families under every common regime. These results show that executable feedback can repair secure-code generation, but its benefits depend on the model, task, feedback entry point, and especially test coverage.

cs.SE↗

arXiv2026

Do Code Language Models Follow Tests? Paired Interventions on Program Behavior

Visible tests specify concrete program behavior, but an improvement in benchmark accuracy does not establish that a model follows the rule expressed by those tests. We study test utilization through matched prompting controls, paired semantic interventions, and test suites selected by fault detection. Our semantic intervention holds an underspecified description and its example inputs fixed while changing the correct outputs to express one of two valid rules. Evaluation on unseen inputs measures whether both generated programs follow their respective rules. Across five models and three runs of 120 paired instances from 20 specification families, mean switching rates range from 11.1\% to 65.8\%. Qwen3.8-27B has the highest point estimate, followed by Qwen3.6-27B at 60.6\%; their paired difference remains uncertain. Explicit descriptions elicit both rules from these two models on every instance, exposing a gap between implementation capability and adoption of test-specified rules. Correct expected outputs improve MBPP+ accuracy beyond inputs alone for all five models. On 180 tasks with fixed three-test suites, high-detection suites detect 30.3 percentage points more errors in a held-out pool dominated by reference mutants. The corresponding generation differences range from $-0.6$ to $+1.1$ points; all intervals include zero and remain compatible with some benefit. Paired interventions make test-specified rule changes measurable alongside implementation capability and benchmark correctness.

cs.SE↗

arXiv2026

Scaling Test-Driven Code Generation from Functions to Classes: An Empirical Study

Test-driven development (TDD) has been adopted to improve Large Language Model (LLM)-based code generation by using tests as executable specifications. However, existing TDD-style code generation studies are largely limited to function-level tasks, leaving class-level synthesis where multiple methods interact through shared state and call dependencies underexplored. In this paper, we scale test-driven code generation from functions to classes via an iterative TDD framework. Our approach first analyzes intra-class method dependencies to derive a feasible generation schedule, and then incrementally implements each method under method-level public tests with reflection-style execution feedback and bounded repair iterations. To support test-driven generation and rigorous class-level evaluation, we construct ClassEval-TDD, a cleaned and standardized variant of ClassEval with consistent specifications, deterministic test environments, and complete method-level public tests. We conduct an empirical study across eight LLMs and compare against the strongest direct-generation baseline (the best of holistic, incremental, and compositional strategies). Our class-level TDD framework consistently improves class-level correctness by 12 to 26 absolute points and achieves up to 71% fully correct classes, while requiring only a small number of repairs on average. These results demonstrate that test-driven generation can effectively scale beyond isolated functions and substantially improve class-level code generation reliability. All code and data are available at https://anonymous.4open.science/r/ClassEval-TDD-C4C9/

cs.SE↗

arXiv2026

Visual Merit or Linguistic Crutch? A Close Look at DeepSeek-OCR

DeepSeek-OCR utilizes an optical 2D mapping approach to achieve high-ratio vision-text compression, claiming to decode text tokens exceeding ten times the input visual tokens. While this suggests a promising solution for the LLM long-context bottleneck, we investigate a critical question: "Visual merit or linguistic crutch - which drives DeepSeek-OCR's performance?" By employing sentence-level and word-level semantic corruption, we isolate the model's intrinsic OCR capabilities from its language priors. Results demonstrate that without linguistic support, DeepSeek-OCR's performance plummets from approximately 90% to 20%. Comparative benchmarking against 13 baseline models reveals that traditional pipeline OCR methods exhibit significantly higher robustness to such semantic perturbations than end-to-end methods. Furthermore, we find that lower visual token counts correlate with increased reliance on priors, exacerbating hallucination risks. Context stress testing also reveals a total model collapse around 10,000 text tokens, suggesting that current optical compression techniques may paradoxically aggravate the long-context bottleneck. This study empirically defines DeepSeek-OCR's capability boundaries and offers essential insights for future optimizations of the vision-text compression paradigm. We release all data, results and scripts used in this study at https://github.com/dududuck00/DeepSeekOCR.

cs.CL↗

arXiv2025

HyClone: Bridging LLM Understanding and Dynamic Execution for Semantic Code Clone Detection

Code clone detection is a critical task in software engineering, aimed at identifying duplicated or similar code fragments within or across software systems. Traditional methods often fail to capture functional equivalence, particularly for semantic clones (Type 4), where code fragments implement identical functionality despite differing syntactic structures. Recent advances in large language models (LLMs) have shown promise in understanding code semantics. However, directly applying LLMs to code clone detection yields suboptimal results due to their sensitivity to syntactic differences. To address these challenges, we propose a novel two-stage framework that combines LLM-based screening with execution-based validation for detecting semantic clones in Python programs. In the first stage, an LLM evaluates code pairs to filter out obvious non-clones based on semantic analysis. For pairs not identified as clones, the second stage employs an execution-based validation approach, utilizing LLM-generated test inputs to assess functional equivalence through cross-execution validation. Our experimental evaluation demonstrates significant improvements in precision, recall, and F1-score compared to direct LLM-based detection, highlighting the framework's effectiveness in identifying semantic clones. Future work includes exploring cross-language clone detection and optimizing the framework for large-scale applications.

cs.SE↗

arXiv2025

Failures Are the Stepping Stones to Success: Enhancing Few-Shot In-Context Learning by Leveraging Negative Samples

Large Language Models exhibit powerful few-shot in-context learning (ICL) capabilities, but the performance is highly sensitive to provided examples. Recent research has focused on retrieving corresponding examples for each input query, not only enhancing the efficiency and scalability of the learning process but also mitigating inherent biases in manual example selection. However, these studies have primarily emphasized leveraging Positive samples while overlooking the additional information within Negative samples for contextual learning. We propose a novel method that utilizes Negative samples to better select Positive sample examples, thereby enhancing the performance of few-shot ICL. Initially, we construct Positive and Negative sample corpora based on Zero-Shot-Cot. Then, during inference, we employ a semantic similarity-based approach to select the most similar examples from both the Positive and Negative corpora for a given query. Subsequently, we further retrieve Positive examples from the Positive sample corpus based on semantic similarity to the Negative examples, then concatenating them with the previously selected Positive examples to serve as ICL demonstrations. Experimental results demonstrate that our approach surpasses methods solely relying on the most similar positive examples for context, validating that the additional information in negative samples aids in enhancing ICL performance through improved Positive sample selection.

cs.CL↗