DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.18600206
title: Validating Formal Specifications with LLM-generated Test Cases: Research artifact

description: This artifact accompanies the FM26 paper entitled "Validating Formal Specifications with LLM-generated Test Cases", which reports an empirical evaluation of using pre-trained large language models (LLMs) to automate the generation of test cases from natural language requirements. 

The artifact provides the scripts, datasets and required tools for reproducing the experiment and the analysis of the results. More specifically, the artifact is split into 3 components:



Data preparation: Scripts to process the existing Alloy4Fun dataset of formal specifications to create the benchmarks for the evaluation. It also contains the pre-computed benchmarks.

Experiment execution: Scripts to execute the experiment for the prepared benchmarks, which involves the use of LLM APIs. Depending on the LLM, this may require an API key. It also contains the pre-computed results from executing the experiment.

Result analysis: Scripts to analyze the results from the experiment, by using a solver to check validity and diversity. It also contains the pre-computed analysis results.


Data



requirements.json: all natural language requirements for which instances were generated, along with pointers to the Alloy4Fun database to retrieve oracles. Each entry consists of the following:



example: its description

model: the declaration of its structure in Alloy

id: the identifier of the model in the Alloy4Fun database containing the oracles

requirements: the list of requirements for this model, containing a description in natural language and the pred encoding its oracle



prompt_zero.txt, prompt_one.txt, and prompt_few.txt: prompts for the generation of valid/invalid instances from requirements

models_20250916.json.gz: a snapshot of the Alloy4Fun database filtered for the exercises used in the evaluation

alloytools.jar: snapshot of AlloyTools, used to parse and execute Alloy models and commands

prepare: directory containing scripts to retrieve oracles and incorrect submissions from the Alloy4Fun database. It contains:



semantic_grouping.py: a script to perform grouping of the entries

merge_reqs_groups.py: a script to merge groups with requirements.json for subsequent analysis

results: a folder with the pre-calculated results for the scripts



execute: directory containing scripts to call LLM APIs for the generation of instances given a dataset of requirements and header prompts. It contains:



claude.py: script for Claude Opus 4.1

gemini.py: script for Gemini 2.5 Pro  

gpt.py: script for GPT-5 and GPT-5 Mini 

llama.py: script for Llama 3.1  

results: a folder with the pre-calculated results for the scripts



analysis: directory containing analysis scripts to process the LLM-generated instances. It contains:



analysis.py: script for testing syntactic and semantic correctness of generated instances, as well as diversity

results: a folder with the pre-calculated results for the scripts

invalid: a folder containing invalid generated instances with annotations




Results

RQ1: Influence of prompt design




Prompt
Tests
Syntax
Scopes
Previous
Valid
%
Cost


Few-shot
258
255
255
252
247
96%
$3.56


One-shot
258
226
208
206
205
79%
$3.69


Zero-shot
258
137
120
119
118
46%
$4.20




RQ2: Effect of non-determinism




Run
Tests
Syntax
Scopes
Previous
Valid
%
Cost


1st
258
255
255
252
247
96%
$3.56


2nd
258
256
256
256
251
97%
$3.50


3rd
258
252
252
250
246
95%
$3.61




RQ3: LLM comparison




Model
Tests
Syntax
Scopes
Previous
Valid
%
Cost


GPT-5
258
255
255
252
247
96%
$3.56


Gemini 2.5 Pro
258
248
220
212
210
81%
$2.78


Claude Opus 4.1
258
258
258
202
197
76%
$5.55


GPT-5 Mini
258
188
183
179
174
67%
$0.53




RQ4: Characterization of invalid test cases

See annotated Alloy files in analysis/invalid for the GPT-5, 3 positive / 3 negative instances, few-show prompt, or the raw failure files in analysis/results.

RQ5: Effectiveness at detecting incorrect specifications




Size
Complete
Wrong
Missed
Mean %


1 pos, 1 neg
41
5587
2204
38.10%


2 pos, 2 neg
34
4623
814
17.02%


3 pos, 3 neg
36
4395
525
9.90%


4 pos, 4 neg
35
5129
446
7.45%


5 pos, 5 neg
35
4816
348
6.43%




Reproducibility

Start by installing the Python requirements.

pip install -r requirements.txt

Data preparation

Script semantic_grouping.py groups together all entries of an Alloy4Fun database that have been submitted to given challenges. Entries are grouped when semantically equivalent according to the Alloy solver (i.e., equivalence within a certain scope). Since the solver is called to compare entries, this may take some time.

Two entries are equivalent for a challenge if the predicate to be filled by the student are equivalent (identified as an empty predicate called from a check command in the root model). This has a few consequences:



This ignores any pre-condition in the check. This means that there may be multiple correct groups (which were equivalent under the pre-conditions).

If the student used any auxiliary predicate, the test will fail, since these are not copied into the test (there are few cases, identified in the log).


The script only considers execution entries that are syntactically correct in the database (no sharing entries, nor errored). 

Script merge_reqs_groups.py can then be used to insert erroneous specifications into the provided requirements.json. The mapping is done via the predicate name: for each example in requirements.json (identified by id in the Alloy4Fun database), each requirement must have the student predicate defined. The script will search for the corresponding groups among the files generated by semantic_grouping.py. The script ignores groups with only 1 entry (i.e., submissions that have only been attempted once).

Usage

Run the grouping script as:

usage: semantic_grouping.py [-h] [-o OUTPUT] [-s SCOPE] jar entries ...

Script for grouping semantically and syntactically equivalent Alloy predicates

positional arguments:  jar                   AlloyTools jar path  entries               JSON entry database path  originals             Ids for the models to process

optional arguments:  -h, --help            show this help message and exit  -o OUTPUT, --output OUTPUT                        Output folder path (default=results)  -s SCOPE, --scope SCOPE                        Scope for equivalence tests (default=3)

This generates a JSON file for each of the selected entries with the grouping information.

Finally, run the merging script into the requirements JSON file:usage: merge_reqs_groups.py [-h] [-o OUTPUT] [-t THRESHOLD] groups reqs

Script for merging entry groups with challenge requirements

positional arguments:  groups                folder with JSONs with entry groups  reqs                  JSON with challenge requirements

optional arguments:  -h, --help            show this help message and exit  -o OUTPUT, --output OUTPUT                        Output JSON path (default=dataset.json)  -t THRESHOLD, --threshold THRESHOLD                        Member group filtering threshold (default=2)

This generates an extended version of the requirements JSON file with grouping information.

Results

The script was run for models Social Network (x3JXgWhJ3uti5Dzxz), Courses (iP5JL36afv5KbDKP6), Production line (dyj49tEp7j6aWAQQX) and Train Station (cXPP9QBPTYgTX6WJ6), with scope 3, for the Alloy4Fun database models_20250916.json.gz. Statistics are in prepare/results/grouping_stats.txt and groups in folder prepare/results. Note: this takes a few hours to run.

python3 prepare/semantic_grouping.py alloytools.jar models_20250916.json.gz cXPP9QBPTYgTX6WJ6 x3JXgWhJ3uti5Dzxz iP5JL36afv5KbDKP6 dyj49tEp7j6aWAQQX 

These groups have been merged into the provided requirements.json in file prepare/results/dataset.json. Statistics are in prepare/results/merging_stats.txt.

python3 prepare/merge_reqs_groups.py prepare/results requirements.json

Experiment execution

Scripts in folder execute call the APIs of the selected LLMs and ask for the generation of instances of the requirements prepared in the previous phase, using one of the provided prompts.

Usage

For each of the supported LLMs (gpt, gemini, claude, llama) , the generation script is run as:

usage: [LLM].py [-h] prompt dataset instances

Script for generating instances using [LLM]

positional arguments:  prompt      the header prompt to be passed to the LLM  dataset     the dataset of natural language requirements  instances   the number of positive and negative instances to be generated

options:  -h, --help  show this help message and exit

Note that running gpt, gemini or claude requires a valid API key to be configured in the environment. For llama, a local model version llama3.1:8b is expected to be running. Note also that running the script for each LLM may take a few hours.

The output of this script is a JSON file extending the provided dataset with a field instances containing instances generated by the LLM. 

Results

The script was run for a few combinations of LLMs (GPT-5, GPT5 Mini, Gemini 2.5 Pro, Claude Opus 4.1), the provided prompts (prompt_zero.txt, prompt_one.txt and prompt_few.txt), and number of instances (from 1 to 5), for the requirements in prepare/results/dataset.json.

For instance, for GPT-5, few-shot prompt and 3 instances, the following command should be run:

python3 execute/gpt.py prompt_few.txt prepare/results/dataset.json 3

The pre-computed results of the generation process as extended JSON files are collected in execute/results.

Results analysis

Scripts in folder analysis process the instances generated by the LLMs and use AlloyTools to check its syntactic and semantic validity, as well as how many erroneous entries in the Alloy4Fun dataset would be detected.

Usage

For each of the JSON files containing LLM-generated instances, the generation script is run as:

usage: analyze.py process [-h] jar results icost ocost

positional arguments:  jar         AlloyTools jar path  results     JSON LLM instance generation results  icost       input cost  ocost       output cost

options:  -h, --help  show this help message and exit

The LLM token cost can be passed to print total cost statistics.

This script reports overall results in terms of valid and failing instances, both in textual .txt and markdown .md format. Additionally, it provides a JSON file reporting all failing instances for inspection.

Alternatively, the analysis can be run for a set of LLM executions specified in a JSON file.

usage: analyze.py all [-h] jar execs

positional arguments:  jar         AlloyTools jar path  execs       JSON file reporting a set of LLM executions and costs

options:  -h, --help  show this help message and exit

Results

To run the analysis for an LLM execution the following command should be run, in this case for GPT-5, few-shot prompt and 3 instances:

python analysis/analyze.py process alloytools.jar execute/results/gpt-5-2025-08-07_230925_few3.json 1.25 10

Running the analysis for all executions of the benchmark can be done with the following command. Note that this takes about 30 minutes to execute.

python analysis/analyze.py all alloytools.jar execute/results/results.json

The script was run for all LLM executions, whose JSON files are stored in execute/results. These pre-computed results of the analysis process are in analysis/results, containing the overall results in textual .txt and markdown .md format. The JSON files reporting failing instances are contained in analysis/invalid.