arXiv:2606. 09852v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: High-quality source code documentation is vital yet often neglected, especially in critical domains like healthcare where reliability and maintainability are essential.
arXiv:2601. 22025v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Evaluating Large Language Model (LLM) applications differs from conventional software testing because outputs are probabilistic, semantically variable, and sensitive to prompt and model changes.
arXiv:2608. 10037v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) increasingly rely on external tools to accomplish complex real-world tasks, making tool documentation a critical grounding resource for LLM agents.
arXiv:2604. 05435v2 Announce Type: replace Abstract: Incomplete or inconsistent discharge documentation drives care fragmentation and avoidable readmissions.
arXiv:2511. 14967v3 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) have shown great promise in generating structured diagrams from natural language descriptions, particularly Mermaid sequence diagrams for software engineering.
arXiv:2607. 13035v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Cloud services experience frequent incidents that require rapid diagnosis and resolution.
Large language models (LLMs) increasingly support complex professional tasks, yet their capabilities in rule-intensive document review remain insufficiently evaluated. National standard documents, such as China GB/T standards, offer a representative testbed: they are lengthy, highly structured, and governed by explicit rules for scope, terminology, normative wording, and cross-section consistency.
arXiv:2607. 06713v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Large language models are rapidly moving towards closing the development cycle, transitioning from simple assistive companions to autonomous contributors deeply embedded into collaborative development environments.
arXiv:2608. 11022v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Model Cards and Data Cards have demonstrated the value of structured, human-readable documentation for machine learning artifacts, capturing their context, parameters, limitations, and intended use.
Rubric-based evaluation is a promising approach for assessing open-ended outputs from LLM-based research agents, particularly in paper reproduction, where direct paper-to-repository comparison is prone to hallucination. However, constructing paper-specific rubrics requires substantial expert effort, limiting the scalability of benchmarks such as PaperBench.
arXiv:2607. 29389v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) have demonstrated a strong ability to generate syntactically correct code from natural-language specifications.
arXiv:2507. 11059v3 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: The rapid advancement of Large Language Models (LLMs) in software engineering has revealed critical limitations in existing benchmarks, particularly the widely used SWE-bench dataset.
arXiv:2607. 05456v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: While recent advances in large language models have enabled end-to-end automated manuscript generation, existing systems suffer from three critical deficiencies: (i) generated claims are not deterministically grounded in verifiable literature, (ii) experimental results are frequently fabricated rather than executed, and (iii) there exists no standardized, multi-dimensional framework to assess whether AI-generated manuscripts meet the quality and rigor required for real-world publication.