The paper introduces ReqClarifyBench, an interactive benchmark for evaluating how well large language models (LLMs) can clarify vague user intent into clear requirements in repository-level software development. It includes 341 tasks across game, miniapp, and web development, each with a vague intent, a human-validated requirement document, and code evaluation artifacts, and uses LLM-based user simulators with diverse personas. The study evaluates six LLMs on clarification effectiveness and requirement quality, finding that stronger clarification does not always yield better documents, performance varies by persona, and coding-agent harnesses do not improve document quality over base LLMs.
By Mingyu Chen, Zhiqing Zhong, Manyi Wang, Linxi Liang, Rouyu Chen, Pinjia He
The paper introduces a three-tier persona vector for user simulation in evaluating LLM agents, comprising 23 dimensions across demographics, behavioral traits, and emotional states, plus a query-complexity overlay. It demonstrates that these nuanced personas generate diverse, scenario-reactive conversations, leading to significant variations in agent goal achievement and compliance across different contexts. The model’s design allows for reproducible, auditable user behavior patterns without relying on learned covariance matrices.
By Rahul Khedar, Eshita, Sneha Teja Sree Reddy Thondapu, Mayank Malhotra, Arup Kumar Das, Jitesh Chandra Mishra, Arun Menon, Avinash Karn, Mouli V
arXiv:2608. 04205v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Human evaluation of AI systems and digital products is costly, slow, and difficult to scale.
By Xiaomin Li, Yuexing Hao, Jianheng Hou, Jintao Huang, Qianfeng Wen, Shirley Huang, Yifan Liu, Xiaoyi Liu, Yilan Fan, Yijun Wang, Koutian Wu, Ruoqi Gao, Muhammad Ahmed Mohsin, Jing Tang, Brihi Joshi, Heming Liu, Zheyuan Deng, Zonglin Di, Sankalp Jajee, Jiuyao Lu, Zhiwei Zhang, Saksham Kapoor, Ishan Gupta, Yunhan Zhao, Chanwoo Park, Yucheng Lu, Bing Hu, Weihang Xiao, Aravind Mohan, Hanwen Xing, Runyu Zhang, Mihir Kulshreshtha, Yuanda Xu, Qianyu Zhu, Dianzhuo Wang, Yuxin Xiao, Bowen Jiang, Yongye Su, Wenhao Chai, Zuxin Liu, Lawrence Yunliang Chen, Xuandong Zhao, Ethan Ye, Shivam Patel, Jason Xie, Alex Martin Richmond, Weixiang Ding, Emre Okcular, Diya Mathew, Ziheng Wang, Rana M. Shahroz Khan, Zhejian Peng, Fang Wu, Fan Nie, Xinyang Han, Yubin Kim, Jiawei Zhang, Zhenting Qi, Huangyuan Su, Xu Pan, Abinitha Gourabathina, Hyewon Jeong, Hemanth Neelgund Ramesh, Kumail Alhamoud, Kimia Hamidieh, Zidi Xiong, Samuel Schmidgall, Pengrui Han, Yepeng Huang, Yongheng Wang, Bowen Yang, Alex Gu, Yuchu Wang, Akshay Paruchuri, Brenna Li, Hejie Cui, Jiayuan Ding, Chaosheng Dong, Jiahao Wang, Yixuan He, Chi Wang, Pamela Bhattacharya, Tianyi Peng, Paul Pu Liang, Mitchell Gordon, Yilun Du, Marinka Zitnik, James Zou, Prasanna Tambe, Philip Torr, Emily Fox, Asu Ozdaglar, Dawn Song
UserSWE is a new benchmark that evaluates coding agents’ ability to fix repository-level bugs through multi‑turn conversations with dynamic users, providing execution‑grounded verdicts after each turn. The benchmark transforms repository histories and existing single‑turn datasets into multi‑turn tasks, using a persona chain derived from 20,859 development sessions to simulate user interactions. Eleven agents were tested on 72 tasks from 42 repositories, revealing that agent rankings shift with the interaction budget and that single‑turn performance alone does not capture interactive coding capability.
By Zhan-Yu Wu, Ji Luo, Alyssa Wu, Junjielong Xu, Richeng Xuan, Zhichao Hu, Chongming Gao, Xinting Hu