REVIEW 1 cited by
Lessons from the Use of Natural Language Inference (NLI) in Requirements Engineering Tasks
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
We investigate the use of Natural Language Inference (NLI) in automating requirements engineering tasks. In particular, we focus on three tasks: requirements classification, identification of requirements specification defects, and detection of conflicts in stakeholders' requirements. While previous research has demonstrated significant benefit in using NLI as a universal method for a broad spectrum of natural language processing tasks, these advantages have not been investigated within the context of software requirements engineering. Therefore, we design experiments to evaluate the use of NLI in requirements analysis. We compare the performance of NLI with a spectrum of approaches, including prompt-based models, conventional transfer learning, Large Language Models (LLMs)-powered chatbot models, and probabilistic models. Through experiments conducted under various learning settings including conventional learning and zero-shot, we demonstrate conclusively that our NLI method surpasses classical NLP methods as well as other LLMs-based and chatbot models in the analysis of requirements specifications. Additionally, we share lessons learned characterizing the learning settings that make NLI a suitable approach for automating requirements engineering tasks.
Forward citations
Cited by 1 Pith paper
-
Systems Engineering for Autonomous Vehicles; Supervising AI using Large Language Models (SSuperLLM)
An LLM, given carefully worded rules, can act as a supervisory controller for a simulated vehicle, but reliability depends on rule phrasing and decision frequency.
Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.