arXiv subjects

Alexander Korn

Publications and source records attributed to Alexander Korn.

5 recordsLinked to original sources

arXiv2026

On the Viability of Requirements Generation From Code: An Experience Report

Empirical research in Requirements Engineering is hampered by a lack of adequate datasets that pair source code with corresponding requirements. A tempting route to addressing this lack is the use of Large Language Models to synthesize requirements from existing code bases. We investigate this question by evaluating an LLM-based and RAG-supported agentic approach that generates requirements from source code, verifies their implementation status relying on a human-in-the-loop, and synthetically introduces requirements smells and non-implemented requirements. Our goal was to create datasets that mimic reality and foster empirical RE research. However, during the study, various problems arose, leading to this experience report. Contrary to our initial hypotheses, LLMs were unable to (i) generate non-implemented requirements reliably, (ii) generate high quality requirements, and (iii) reliably introduce synthetic requirements smells. Furthermore, neither an LLM nor a single human-in-the-loop suffices to detect requirements smells reliably. These findings suggest that the generation of code-to-requirements datasets using LLMs is not yet viable and requires human supervision, especially for quality assurance. We critically reflect on our lessons learned and draw relevant conclusions for both researchers and practitioners.

cs.SE↗

arXiv2026

Reporting LLM Prompting in Automated Software Engineering: A Guideline Based on Current Practices and Expectations

Large Language Models, particularly decoder-only generative models such as GPT, are increasingly used to automate Software Engineering tasks. These models are primarily guided through natural language prompts, making prompt engineering a critical factor in system performance and behavior. Despite their growing role in SE research, prompt-related decisions are rarely documented in a systematic or transparent manner, hindering reproducibility and comparability across studies. To address this gap, we conducted a two-phase empirical study. First, we analyzed nearly 300 papers published at the top-3 SE conferences since 2022 to assess how prompt design, testing, and optimization are currently reported. Second, we surveyed 105 program committee members from these conferences to capture their expectations for prompt reporting in LLM-driven research. Based on the findings, we derived a structured guideline that distinguishes essential, desirable, and exceptional reporting elements. Our results reveal significant misalignment between current practices and reviewer expectations, particularly regarding version disclosure, prompt justification, and threats to validity. We present our guideline as a step toward improving transparency, reproducibility, and methodological rigor in LLM-based SE research.

cs.SE↗

arXiv2025

Prompts as Software Engineering Artifacts: A Research Agenda and Preliminary Findings

Developers now routinely interact with large language models (LLMs) to support a range of software engineering (SE) tasks. This prominent role positions prompts as potential SE artifacts that, like other artifacts, may require systematic development, documentation, and maintenance. However, little is known about how prompts are actually used and managed in LLM-integrated workflows, what challenges practitioners face, and whether the benefits of systematic prompt management outweigh the associated effort. To address this gap, we propose a research programme that (a) characterizes current prompt practices, challenges, and influencing factors in SE; (b) analyzes prompts as software artifacts, examining their evolution, traceability, reuse, and the trade-offs of systematic management; and (c) develops and empirically evaluates evidence-based guidelines for managing prompts in LLM-integrated workflows. As a first step, we conducted an exploratory survey with 74 software professionals from six countries to investigate current prompt practices and challenges. The findings reveal that prompt usage in SE is largely ad-hoc: prompts are often refined through trial-and-error, rarely reused, and shaped more by individual heuristics than standardized practices. These insights not only highlight the need for more systematic approaches to prompt management but also provide the empirical foundation for the subsequent stages of our research programme.

cs.SE↗

arXiv2025

LLMREI: Automating Requirements Elicitation Interviews with LLMs

Requirements elicitation interviews are crucial for gathering system requirements but heavily depend on skilled analysts, making them resource-intensive, susceptible to human biases, and prone to miscommunication. Recent advancements in Large Language Models present new opportunities for automating parts of this process. This study introduces LLMREI, a chat bot designed to conduct requirements elicitation interviews with minimal human intervention, aiming to reduce common interviewer errors and improve the scalability of requirements elicitation. We explored two main approaches, zero-shot prompting and least-to-most prompting, to optimize LLMREI for requirements elicitation and evaluated its performance in 33 simulated stakeholder interviews. A third approach, fine-tuning, was initially considered but abandoned due to poor performance in preliminary trials. Our study assesses the chat bot's effectiveness in three key areas: minimizing common interview errors, extracting relevant requirements, and adapting its questioning based on interview context and user responses. Our findings indicate that LLMREI makes a similar number of errors compared to human interviewers, is capable of extracting a large portion of requirements, and demonstrates a notable ability to generate highly context-dependent questions. We envision the greatest benefit of LLMREI in automating interviews with a large number of stakeholders.

cs.SE↗

arXiv2025

On the Impact of Requirements Smells in Prompts: The Case of Automated Traceability

Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly used to generate software artifacts, such as source code, tests, and trace links. Requirements play a central role in shaping the input prompts that guide LLMs, as they are often used as part of the prompts to synthesize the artifacts. However, the impact of requirements formulation on LLM performance remains unclear. In this paper, we investigate the role of requirements smells-indicators of potential issues like ambiguity and inconsistency-when used in prompts for LLMs. We conducted experiments using two LLMs focusing on automated trace link generation between requirements and code. Our results show mixed outcomes: while requirements smells had a small but significant effect when predicting whether a requirement was implemented in a piece of code (i.e., a trace link exists), no significant effect was observed when tracing the requirements with the associated lines of code. These findings suggest that requirements smells can affect LLM performance in certain SE tasks but may not uniformly impact all tasks. We highlight the need for further research to understand these nuances and propose future work toward developing guidelines for mitigating the negative effects of requirements smells in AI-driven SE processes.

cs.SE↗