Skip to content
Preprint

Large Language Models for Requirements Engineering: A Cross-Task Empirical Evaluation

Aug 2026 · 1 citation · 58 references
Computer Science

TL;DR

This work presents the first cross-task empirical evaluation of LLMs spanning five RE-related activities, as well as replication materials supporting reproducibility, and a broader understanding of the capabilities, limitations, and practical readiness of current LLMs for RE.

Abstract

Requirements-related information is scattered across heterogeneous artefacts such as user feedback, developer discussions, and software repositories, making the extraction of actionable requirements knowledge labour-intensive and hard to scale. Large Language Models (LLMs) can support many Requirements Engineering (RE) activities, from classification and traceability identification to specification and explanation generation, but existing evidence is fragmented across tasks, artefact types, and evaluation settings, and studies rarely offer cross-task evaluations or replication packages. We present two complementary empirical studies evaluating LLMs across five RE-related activities. The first is a controlled experiment on five lightweight open-source LLMs for feedback-driven requirements classification and specification generation. The second is an exploratory industrial case study on two frontier LLMs for traceability link identification and traceability explanation generation using real project artefacts. Classification and traceability identification were assessed with quantitative metrics, and generation tasks through human evaluation. LLM performance is strongly task-dependent, ranging from moderate to high, and no single model consistently outperformed the others, indicating that effective adoption depends on selecting models and prompting strategies per task. Our contributions are: (i) the first cross-task empirical evaluation of LLMs spanning five RE-related activities, (ii) replication materials supporting reproducibility, and (iii) a broader understanding of the capabilities, limitations, and practical readiness of current LLMs for RE.

View source

Similar papers

Review Open access Aug 2026

Automated Software Requirements Elicitation: A Systematic Mapping Study

A systematic mapping study of 74 peer-reviewed primary studies on AI-based automated requirements elicitation published between 2021 and 2025, identified from five databases following PRISMA 2020 and classified by AI technique, textual source, elicitation activity, and application domain gives researchers and practitio...

Safaa Eltahier, S. Al-Ghuribi, Mawal A. Mohammed et al. · 0 citations
Open access Mar 2025

LLMs’ reshaping of people, processes, products, and society in software development: a qualitative exploration with early adopters

Interviews with sixteen early-adopter software professionals who integrated LLM-based tools into their day-to-day work in early to mid-2023 offer actionable implications for developers, organizations, educators, and tool designers seeking to integrate LLMs responsibly into professional software practice.

Benyamin T. Tabarsi, Heidi Reichert, Sam Gilson et al. · 22 citations · ⚡1
Open access 2026

Enhancing Code Quality through AI-Powered Metric-Driven Refactoring: A Multi-Model Analysis

Investigating LLMs as metric-driven refactoring assistants rather than code generators suggests that while LLMs are valuable assistants for structural improvement, their interventions require careful monitoring to avoid unintended trade-offs.

Tindwende Thierry Sawadogo, Fadel Touré · 0 citations
Open access 2026

A Comparative Study of LLMs and Human Judgment in UML Diagram Evaluation

This paper investigates the reliability of LLMs in evaluating UML diagrams generated through reverse engineering processes (source code) and asks: do LLM assessments align with those of human experts?

Olena Chebanyuk, Carles Sierra · 0 citations
Book Open access Jul 2026

Engineering Practices in Open-Source Agent Frameworks: A Large-Scale Empirical Study

A large-scale empirical study of mainstream open-source agent frameworks from an engineering perspective, providing empirical evidence linking framework design choices to engineering risks and highlighting the need for stronger guidance and support in agent framework development.

Yibo Zhai, Junjun Si, Yan Wang et al. · 0 citations
Preprint Aug 2026

From Metrics to Improvement: A Lifecycle-Aware LLM Feedback Framework for Research Software Quality

A lifecycle-aware framework that integrates quantitative software quality assessment with Large Language Model (LLM)-based code refinement is proposed and the potential of metric-driven LLM feedback for research software quality improvement is demonstrated while highlighting its inherently multi-objective nature.

Nafis Tanveer Islam, N. Soveizi, Yutong Li et al. · 0 citations

We use cookies to run the site and, with your consent, for analytics and to show ads. See our Cookie Policy.