REVIEW 3 cited by
How Effective are Large Language Models in Generating Software Specifications?
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
read the original abstract
Software specifications are essential for many Software Engineering (SE) tasks such as bug detection and test generation. Many existing approaches are proposed to extract the specifications defined in natural language form (e.g., comments) into formal machine readable form (e.g., first order logic). However, existing approaches suffer from limited generalizability and require manual efforts. The recent emergence of Large Language Models (LLMs), which have been successfully applied to numerous SE tasks, offers a promising avenue for automating this process. In this paper, we conduct the first empirical study to evaluate the capabilities of LLMs for generating software specifications from software comments or documentation. We evaluate LLMs performance with Few Shot Learning (FSL) and compare the performance of 13 state of the art LLMs with traditional approaches on three public datasets. In addition, we conduct a comparative diagnosis of the failure cases from both LLMs and traditional methods, identifying their unique strengths and weaknesses. Our study offers valuable insights for future research to improve specification generation.
Forward citations
Cited by 3 Pith papers
-
Breaking the Myth: Can Small Models Infer Postconditions Too?
Fine-tuning Qwen2.5-Coder-7B on 1.5K reasoning examples yields postcondition generation close to GPT-4o and better than 32B open models on Defects4J.
-
GrowthHacker: Automated Off-Policy Evaluation Optimization Using Code-Modifying LLM Agents
A benchmark and small-scale evaluation suggesting LLM agents can modify off-policy evaluation code and sometimes improve the measured metrics, with the authors' two-agent framework the most reliable of those tested.
-
VulBinLLM: LLM-powered Vulnerability Detection for Stripped Binaries
An LLM pipeline that enriches decompiled code with vulnerability hints and then classifies CWEs reports high Juliet accuracy, but leaky hints and unmatched baselines weaken the claim.
Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.