Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 cited by

ClarifyGPT: Empowering LLM-based Code Generation with Intention Clarification

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 2310.10996 v1 pith:GYOQFF7U submitted 2023-10-17 cs.SE

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

We introduce a novel framework named ClarifyGPT, which aims to enhance code generation by empowering LLMs with the ability to identify ambiguous requirements and ask targeted clarifying questions. In particular, ClarifyGPT first detects whether a given requirement is ambiguous by performing a code consistency check. If it is ambiguous, ClarifyGPT prompts an LLM to generate targeted clarifying questions. After receiving question responses, ClarifyGPT refines the ambiguous requirement and inputs it into the same LLM to generate a final code solution. To evaluate our ClarifyGPT, we first conduct a human evaluation involving ten participants who use ClarifyGPT for code generation on two publicly available benchmarks: MBPP-sanitized and MBPP-ET. The results show that ClarifyGPT elevates the performance (Pass@1) of GPT-4 from 70.96% to 80.80% on MBPP-sanitized. Furthermore, to perform large-scale automated evaluations of ClarifyGPT across different LLMs and benchmarks without requiring user participation, we introduce a high-fidelity simulation method to simulate user responses. The automated evaluation results also demonstrate that ClarifyGPT can significantly enhance code generation performance compared to the baselines. In particular, ClarifyGPT improves the average performance of GPT-4 and ChatGPT across four benchmarks from 68.02% to 75.75% and from 58.55% to 67.22%, respectively. We believe that ClarifyGPT can effectively facilitate the practical application of LLMs in real-world development environments.

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 4 Pith papers

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

  1. Obey, Diverge, Collapse: Blind Obedience to Incorrect Instructions Drives Code LLMs to Irrecoverable Code Semantic Collapse

    cs.SE 2026-07 conditional novelty 6.5 of 10

    Code LLMs correctly label incorrect repair instructions as wrong, then follow them anyway, creating compounding Ghost Errors that self-guided iterative repair usually cannot reverse.

  2. Exploring the Challenges and Opportunities of AI-assisted Codebase Generation

    cs.SE 2025-08 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    Developers prompting codebase-level AI assistants are often dissatisfied with generated code, citing missing functionality, poor code quality, and communication gaps, despite varied prompting strategies.

  3. LLMCup: Ranking-Enhanced Comment Updating with LLMs

    cs.SE 2025-07 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    LLMCup combines multi-prompt LLM comment generation with a learned ranker, achieving 0.383 exact-match accuracy on the CUP test set versus 0.257 for HebCup and 0.177 for CUP.

  4. LLM-Based Agentic Systems for Software Engineering: Challenges and Opportunities

    cs.SE 2026-01 unverdicted novelty 2.0 of 10

    A survey of LLM-based multi-agent systems across the software development life cycle, plus a research agenda for orchestration, human coordination, cost, and data.

Pith tools