jungsteven

5 ms·

1. 1.▲
   by jungsteven 2y ago

   Appreciate the feedback and suggestions!
2. 2.▲
   by jungsteven 2y ago

   Thanks for sharing the papers! I remember reading the first one from Google and can’t wait to dive into the new one. Appreciate the insights!
3. 3.▲
   by jungsteven 2y ago

   + it would be great to see more research comparing LLMs and traditional methods in terms of cost-effectiveness. In my opinion, regarding the cost issue, there are engineering ways to mitigate this, such as running the LLMs only on changed c
4. 4.▲
   by jungsteven 2y ago

   Nice question! The paper acknowledges that LLMs generate mutations slower and are more costly than traditional methods like PIT and Major, which are traditional testing tools. They did include metrics like cost per 1K mutations. However, th
5. 5.▲
   by jungsteven 2y ago

   Hey engineer here. Mutation testing may not be a familiar concept. To put it simply, it tells you how effective your unit test cases are at catching faults by injecting faults into your codebase. If you are interested in learning more about