SEAIMar 13

Automated Self-Testing as a Quality Gate: Evidence-Driven Release Management for LLM Applications

arXiv:2603.156767.91 citationsh-index: 2
Predicted impact top 90% in SE · last 90 daysOriginality Incremental advance
AI Analysis

This addresses the challenge of managing releases for non-deterministic LLM applications, though it appears incremental as it builds on existing testing concepts with specific adaptations for LLMs.

The authors tackled the problem of release governance for LLM applications by developing an automated self-testing framework with quality gates across five dimensions, which identified two ROLLBACK-grade builds in early runs and supported stable quality evolution over a four-week staging lifecycle.

LLM applications are AI systems whose non-deterministic outputs and evolving model behavior make traditional testing insufficient for release governance. We present an automated self-testing framework that introduces quality gates with evidence-based release decisions (PROMOTE/HOLD/ROLLBACK) across five empirically grounded dimensions: task success rate, research context preservation, P95 latency, safety pass rate, and evidence coverage. We evaluate the framework through a longitudinal case study of an internally deployed multi-agent conversational AI system with specific marketing capabilities in active development, covering 38 evaluation runs across 20+ internal releases. The gate identified two ROLLBACK-grade builds in early runs and supported stable quality evolution over a four-week staging lifecycle while exercising persona-grounded, multi-turn, adversarial, and evidence-required scenarios. Statistical analysis (Mann-Kendall trends, Spearman correlations, bootstrap confidence intervals), gate ablation, and overhead scaling indicate that evidence coverage is the primary severe-regression discriminator and that runtime scales predictably with suite size. A human calibration study (n=60 stratified cases, two independent evaluators, LLM-as-judge cross-validation) reveals complementary multi-modal coverage: LLM-judge disagreements with the system gate (kappa=0.13) are attributable to structural failure modes such as latency violations and routing errors that are invisible in response text alone, while the judge independently surfaces content quality failures missed by structural checks, validating the multi-dimensional gate design. The framework, supplementary pseudocode, and calibration artifacts are provided to support AI-system quality assurance and independent replication.

Foundations

The foundational work for this paper's niche, ranked by how specifically the neighbourhood builds on it — not by global fame.

Your Notes