Skip to content

Polymorphic coverage types ∗

Unknown authors
· 0 citations · 65 references

TL;DR

A new refinement type-based verification procedure for validating the coverage provided by input test generators, based on a novel interpretation of types that embeds “ must -style” underapproximate reasoning principles as a fundamental part of the type system.

View source

Similar papers

Open access Aug 2026

Compositional Generator Equivalence

This paper provides a formal account of the syntax and semantics of Hedgehog, a popular PBT framework, and proves that Hedgehog→ possesses a compositional distribution semantics, and introduces Hedgehog→, a restricted version of the language based on the arrow calculus, and proves that Hedgehog→ possesses a composition...

Anthony Vandikas, Kiarash Sotoudeh, Marsha Chechik · 0 citations
Open access Aug 2026

Property-based testing in Python: empirical insights

These findings provide the largest empirical characterization of PBT in Python to date, highlight developers’ difficulties in adopting the technique, and expose limitations of current tool support.

Isadora Viana Valle de Oliveira, Arthur Lisboa Corgozinho, Henrique Rocha et al. · 0 citations
Preprint Aug 2026

How Powerful are LLMs in Generating Formal Program Specifications?

Coins is introduced, a Rocq based evaluation framework that assesses specification quality by instantiating specifications under evaluation on trusted test cases and generating concrete proof obligations, and finds that accurate specification evaluation, rather than model scaling alone, is central to understanding the...

Fan-Peng Yang, Xing Li, Shu-Ling Wang et al. · 0 citations
Book Aug 2026

Can Formal Specifications Be Synthesized from Tests Alone?

This approach uses LLMs to infer candidate specifications solely from test code and dynamic execution traces: the LLM observes only the program interface, selected inputs, and corresponding outputs or state changes, while the implementation internals remain hidden.

Tian-Hai Liu, Maximilian Müller, Tobias Hey et al. · 0 citations
Review Aug 2026

Combining Tests and Proofs with Contracts for Better Software Verification

Test or prove? These two approaches to software verification have long been presented as opposites. One is dynamic, the other static: A test executes the program, a proof only analyzes the program text. A different perspective is emerging, in which testing and proving are complementary rather than competing techniques...

Li Huang, Bertrand Meyer, M. Oriol · 0 citations
Review Aug 2026

Refine After Generation: Toward Correct and Concise Patches in LLM-based Program Repair

This paper identifies patch verbosity as a major yet overlooked concern in LLM-based APR and proposes RECAP, a lightweight, plug-and-play adapter that attaches to existing repair frameworks after generation that achieves a substantially better size-correctness tradeoff.

Wen-Qiang Luo, J. Keung, Xiaoyu Shi et al. · 0 citations

We use cookies to run the site and, with your consent, for analytics and to show ads. See our Cookie Policy.