Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 cited by

Large Language Models Should Ask Clarifying Questions to Increase Confidence in Generated Code

Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.

SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event

T0 review · schema-true

One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.

pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp

arxiv 2308.13507 v2 pith:ZFWKQUVY submitted 2023-08-25 cs.SE cs.AIcs.LG

classification cs.SEcs.AIcs.LG
keywords codeconfidencegeneratedllmsquestionsclarifyingambiguityengineers
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal
0 comments
read the original abstract

Large language models (LLMs) have significantly improved the ability to perform tasks in the field of code generation. However, there is still a gap between LLMs being capable coders and being top-tier software engineers. Based on the observation that toplevel software engineers often ask clarifying questions to reduce ambiguity in both requirements and coding solutions, I argue that the same should be applied to LLMs for code generation tasks. By asking probing questions in various topics before generating the final code, the challenges of programming with LLMs, such as unclear intent specification, lack of computational thinking, and undesired code quality, may be alleviated. This, in turn, increases confidence in the generated code. In this work, I explore how to leverage better communication skills to achieve greater confidence in generated code. I propose a communication-centered process that uses an LLM-generated communicator to identify issues with high ambiguity or low confidence in problem descriptions and generated code. I then ask clarifying questions to obtain responses from users for refining the code.

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 2 Pith papers

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score.

  1. Guiding Human Validation of LLM-Generated Code via Verifiable Literate Programming

    cs.SE 2026-07 unverdicted novelty 6.0 of 10

    VLP adds an NL documentation layer with trace-linked mismatch detection and derived formal checks to make human validation of LLM code feasible, lifting pass@1 from 28.7-73.2% to 65.4-93.5%.

  2. Learning to Ask: When LLM Agents Meet Unclear Instruction

    cs.CL 2024-08 unverdicted novelty 6.0 of 10

    Introduces NoisyToolBench benchmark and Ask-when-Needed framework to improve LLM tool-use performance when user instructions are unclear or incomplete.

Pith tools