Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 cited by

Using Large Language Models for Natural Language Processing Tasks in Requirements Engineering: A Systematic Guideline

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 2402.13823 v3 pith:GKGXIX4T submitted 2024-02-21 cs.SE

classification cs.SE
keywords llmslanguagetasksaddresschaptereffectivelyengineeringguideline
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal
0 comments
read the original abstract

Large Language Models (LLMs) are the cornerstone in automating Requirements Engineering (RE) tasks, underpinning recent advancements in the field. Their pre-trained comprehension of natural language is pivotal for effectively tailoring them to specific RE tasks. However, selecting an appropriate LLM from a myriad of existing architectures and fine-tuning it to address the intricacies of a given task poses a significant challenge for researchers and practitioners in the RE domain. Utilizing LLMs effectively for NLP problems in RE necessitates a dual understanding: firstly, of the inner workings of LLMs, and secondly, of a systematic approach to selecting and adapting LLMs for NLP4RE tasks. This chapter aims to furnish readers with essential knowledge about LLMs in its initial segment. Subsequently, it provides a comprehensive guideline tailored for students, researchers, and practitioners on harnessing LLMs to address their specific objectives. By offering insights into the workings of LLMs and furnishing a practical guide, this chapter contributes towards improving future research and applications leveraging LLMs for solving RE challenges.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 3 Pith papers

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

  1. LLM-Driven Cost-Effective Requirements Change Impact Analysis

    cs.SE 2025-10 unverdicted novelty 6.0 of 10

    ProReFiCIA uses LLMs with tailored prompts to identify impacted requirements, achieving 85.7% recall on unseen industrial data while requiring review of only 3% of requirements, rising to 95.7% recall with RAG at 3.6%...

  2. Automatic Generation of Explainability Requirements and Software Explanations From User Reviews

    cs.SE 2025-07 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    A ChatGPT-based pipeline can draft explainability requirements and explanations from app reviews, but engineers still prefer manually written requirements and users find AI explanations stylish yet less correct.

  3. Model-Driven Requirements Configuration with Three-Valued Uncertainty Scoring

    cs.SE 2026-07 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

    An LLM-plus-symbolic-validator loop cuts structural requirement errors to 0.39% under a small model (0% under a frontier model) and quantifies ~25% of LLM choices as valid but indeterminate.

Pith tools