Trust at Your Own Peril: A Mixed Methods Exploration of the Ability of Large Language Models to Generate Expert-Like Systems Engineering Artifacts and a Characterization of Failure Modes

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2502.09690v1
• Date: Thu, 13 Feb 2025 17:05:18 GMT
• Title: Trust at Your Own Peril: A Mixed Methods Exploration of the Ability of Large Language Models to Generate Expert-Like Systems Engineering Artifacts and a Characterization of Failure Modes
• Authors: Taylan G. Topcu, Mohammed Husain, Max Ofsa, Paul Wach,
• Abstract summary: We present results from an empirical exploration, where a human expert-generated SE artifact was taken as a benchmark. We then adopted a two-fold mixed-methods approach to compare AI generated artifacts against the benchmark. We find that while the two-material appear very similar, AI generated artifacts exhibit serious failure modes that could be difficult to detect.
• Score: 0.0
• License:
• Abstract: Multi-purpose Large Language Models (LLMs), a subset of generative Artificial Intelligence (AI), have recently made significant progress. While expectations for LLMs to assist systems engineering (SE) tasks are paramount; the interdisciplinary and complex nature of systems, along with the need to synthesize deep-domain knowledge and operational context, raise questions regarding the efficacy of LLMs to generate SE artifacts, particularly given that they are trained using data that is broadly available on the internet. To that end, we present results from an empirical exploration, where a human expert-generated SE artifact was taken as a benchmark, parsed, and fed into various LLMs through prompt engineering to generate segments of typical SE artifacts. This procedure was applied without any fine-tuning or calibration to document baseline LLM performance. We then adopted a two-fold mixed-methods approach to compare AI generated artifacts against the benchmark. First, we quantitatively compare the artifacts using natural language processing algorithms and find that when prompted carefully, the state-of-the-art algorithms cannot differentiate AI-generated artifacts from the human-expert benchmark. Second, we conduct a qualitative deep dive to investigate how they differ in terms of quality. We document that while the two-material appear very similar, AI generated artifacts exhibit serious failure modes that could be difficult to detect. We characterize these as: premature requirements definition, unsubstantiated numerical estimates, and propensity to overspecify. We contend that this study tells a cautionary tale about why the SE community must be more cautious adopting AI suggested feedback, at least when generated by multi-purpose LLMs.

Related papers

• Leveraging Explainable AI for LLM Text Attribution: Differentiating Human-Written and Multiple LLMs-Generated Text [1.1137087573421256]
  This study aims to support efforts to detect and identify textual content generated using Generative AI Large Language Models. We leverage several machine learning algorithms such as Random Forest (RF), and Recurrent Neural Networks (RNN) to understand the important features in attribution. Our method is divided into 1) binary classification to differentiate between human-written and AI-text, and 2) multi classification, to differentiate between human-written text and the text generated by the five different LLM tools.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-01-06T18:46:53Z)
• An Empirical Study on Automatically Detecting AI-Generated Source Code: How Far Are We? [8.0988059417354]
  We propose a range of approaches to improve the performance of AI-generated code detection. Our best model outperforms state-of-the-art AI-generated code detector (GPTSniffer) and achieves an F1 score of 82.55.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-11-06T22:48:18Z)
• GigaCheck: Detecting LLM-generated Content [72.27323884094953]
  In this work, we investigate the task of generated text detection by proposing the GigaCheck. Our research explores two approaches: (i) distinguishing human-written texts from LLM-generated ones, and (ii) detecting LLM-generated intervals in Human-Machine collaborative texts. Specifically, we use a fine-tuned general-purpose LLM in conjunction with a DETR-like detection model, adapted from computer vision, to localize AI-generated intervals within text.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-31T08:30:55Z)
• RA-BLIP: Multimodal Adaptive Retrieval-Augmented Bootstrapping Language-Image Pre-training [55.54020926284334]
  Multimodal Large Language Models (MLLMs) have recently received substantial interest, which shows their emerging potential as general-purpose models for various vision-language tasks. Retrieval augmentation techniques have proven to be effective plugins for both LLMs and MLLMs. In this study, we propose multimodal adaptive Retrieval-Augmented Bootstrapping Language-Image Pre-training (RA-BLIP), a novel retrieval-augmented framework for various MLLMs.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-18T03:45:19Z)
• EVOLvE: Evaluating and Optimizing LLMs For Exploration [76.66831821738927]
  Large language models (LLMs) remain under-studied in scenarios requiring optimal decision-making under uncertainty. We measure LLMs' (in)ability to make optimal decisions in bandits, a state-less reinforcement learning setting relevant to many applications. Motivated by the existence of optimal exploration algorithms, we propose efficient ways to integrate this algorithmic knowledge into LLMs.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-08T17:54:03Z)
• Detecting Hallucinations in Large Language Model Generation: A Token Probability Approach [0.0]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) produce inaccurate outputs, also known as hallucinations. This paper introduces a supervised learning approach employing only four numerical features derived from tokens and vocabulary probabilities obtained from other evaluators. The method yields promising results, surpassing state-of-the-art outcomes in multiple tasks across three different benchmarks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-05-30T03:00:47Z)
• Characterization of Large Language Model Development in the Datacenter [55.9909258342639]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) have presented impressive performance across several transformative tasks. However, it is non-trivial to efficiently utilize large-scale cluster resources to develop LLMs. We present an in-depth characterization study of a six-month LLM development workload trace collected from our GPU datacenter Acme.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-03-12T13:31:14Z)
• Knowledge Plugins: Enhancing Large Language Models for Domain-Specific Recommendations [50.81844184210381]
  We propose a general paradigm that augments large language models with DOmain-specific KnowledgE to enhance their performance on practical applications, namely DOKE. This paradigm relies on a domain knowledge extractor, working in three steps: 1) preparing effective knowledge for the task; 2) selecting the knowledge for each specific sample; and 3) expressing the knowledge in an LLM-understandable way.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-11-16T07:09:38Z)
• Intrinsic Language-Guided Exploration for Complex Long-Horizon Robotic Manipulation Tasks [12.27904219271791]
  Current reinforcement learning algorithms struggle in sparse and complex environments. We propose the Intrinsically Guided Exploration from Large Language Models (IGE-LLMs) framework.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-09-28T11:14:52Z)
• How Effective are Large Language Models in Generating Software Specifications? [14.170320751508502]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) have been successfully applied to numerous Software Engineering (SE) tasks. We conduct the first empirical study to evaluate the capabilities of LLMs for generating software specifications from software comments or documentation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-06-06T00:28:39Z)
• Pre-training Multi-task Contrastive Learning Models for Scientific Literature Understanding [52.723297744257536]
  Pre-trained language models (LMs) have shown effectiveness in scientific literature understanding tasks. We propose a multi-task contrastive learning framework, SciMult, to facilitate common knowledge sharing across different literature understanding tasks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-05-23T16:47:22Z)

This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.

This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.