Papers
Topics
Authors
Recent
Gemini 2.5 Flash
Gemini 2.5 Flash
95 tokens/sec
Gemini 2.5 Pro Premium
32 tokens/sec
GPT-5 Medium
18 tokens/sec
GPT-5 High Premium
20 tokens/sec
GPT-4o
97 tokens/sec
DeepSeek R1 via Azure Premium
87 tokens/sec
GPT OSS 120B via Groq Premium
468 tokens/sec
Kimi K2 via Groq Premium
202 tokens/sec
2000 character limit reached

Leveraging LLMs for Semantic Conflict Detection via Unit Test Generation (2507.06762v1)

Published 9 Jul 2025 in cs.SE

Abstract: Semantic conflicts arise when a developer introduces changes to a codebase that unintentionally affect the behavior of changes integrated in parallel by other developers. Traditional merge tools are unable to detect such conflicts, so complementary tools like SMAT have been proposed. SMAT relies on generating and executing unit tests: if a test fails on the base version, passes on a developer's modified version, but fails again after merging with another developer's changes, a semantic conflict is indicated. While SMAT is effective at detecting conflicts, it suffers from a high rate of false negatives, partly due to the limitations of unit test generation tools such as Randoop and Evosuite. To investigate whether LLMs can overcome these limitations, we propose and integrate a new test generation tool based on Code Llama 70B into SMAT. We explore the model's ability to generate tests using different interaction strategies, prompt contents, and parameter configurations. Our evaluation uses two samples: a benchmark with simpler systems from related work, and a more significant sample based on complex, real-world systems. We assess the effectiveness of the new SMAT extension in detecting conflicts. Results indicate that, although LLM-based test generation remains challenging and computationally expensive in complex scenarios, there is promising potential for improving semantic conflict detection. -- Conflitos semanticos surgem quando um desenvolvedor introduz mudan\c{c}as em uma base de c\'odigo que afetam, de forma n~ao intencional, o comportamento de altera\c{c}~oes integradas em paralelo por outros desenvolvedores. Ferramentas tradicionais de merge n~ao conseguem detectar esse tipo de conflito, por isso ferramentas complementares como o SMAT foram propostas. O SMAT depende da gera\c{c}~ao e execu\c{c}~ao de testes de unidade: se um teste falha na vers~ao base, passa na vers~ao modificada por um desenvolvedor, mas volta a falhar ap\'os o merge com as mudan\c{c}as de outro desenvolvedor, um conflito semantico \'e identificado. Embora o SMAT seja eficaz na detec\c{c}~ao de conflitos, apresenta alta taxa de falsos negativos, em parte devido `as limita\c{c}~oes das ferramentas de gera\c{c}~ao de testes como Randoop e Evosuite. Para investigar se modelos de linguagem de grande porte (LLMs) podem superar essas limita\c{c}~oes, propomos e integramos ao SMAT uma nova ferramenta de gera\c{c}~ao de testes baseada no Code Llama 70B. Exploramos a capacidade do modelo de gerar testes utilizando diferentes estrat\'egias de intera\c{c}~ao, conte\'udos de prompts e configura\c{c}~oes de parametros. Nossa avalia\c{c}~ao utiliza duas amostras: um benchmark com sistemas mais simples, usados em trabalhos relacionados, e uma amostra mais significativa baseada em sistemas complexos e reais. Avaliamos a efic\'acia da nova extens~ao do SMAT na detec\c{c}~ao de conflitos. Os resultados indicam que, embora a gera\c{c}~ao de testes por LLM em cen\'arios complexos ainda seja desafiadora e custosa computacionalmente, h\'a potencial promissor para aprimorar a detec\c{c}~ao de conflitos semanticos.

Summary

We haven't generated a summary for this paper yet.

Dice Question Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com

Follow-up Questions

We haven't generated follow-up questions for this paper yet.

X Twitter Logo Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com