Automated Repair of Ambiguous Problem Descriptions for LLM-Based Code Generation

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2505.07270v3
• Date: Wed, 24 Sep 2025 02:19:16 GMT
• Title: Automated Repair of Ambiguous Problem Descriptions for LLM-Based Code Generation
• Authors: Haoxiang Jia, Robbie Morris, He Ye, Federica Sarro, Sergey Mechtaev,
• Abstract summary: ambiguity of natural language (NL) can harm software quality.<n>We introduce an automated repair of ambiguous NL descriptions.<n>We implement this approach in a tool called SpecFix.
• Score: 9.943472604121425
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: The growing use of large language models (LLMs) has increased the importance of natural language (NL) in software engineering. However, ambiguity of NL can harm software quality, as unclear problem descriptions may lead to incorrect program generation. Detecting and resolving such ambiguity is challenging, motivating our introduction of the automated repair of ambiguous NL descriptions, which we approach by reducing code generation uncertainty and better aligning NL with input-output examples. Ambiguity repair is difficult for LLMs because they must understand how their interpretation of a description changes when the text is altered. We find that directly prompting LLMs to clarify ambiguity often produces irrelevant or inconsistent edits. To address this, we decompose this task into two simpler steps: (1) analyzing and repairing the LLM's interpretation of the description - captured by the distribution of programs it induces - using traditional testing and program repair, and (2) refining the description based on distribution changes via a method we call contrastive specification inference. We implement this approach in a tool called SpecFix and evaluate it using four state-of-the-art LLMs (GPT-4o, GPT-4o-mini, DeepSeek-V3, and Qwen2.5-Coder-32B-Instruct) on three popular code generation benchmarks (HumanEval+, MBPP+ and LiveCodeBench). Without human intervention or external information, SpecFix modified 43.58% of descriptions, improving Pass@1 on the modified set by 30.9%. This yields a 4.09% absolute improvement across the entire benchmark. Repairs also transfer across models: descriptions repaired for one model improve other models' performance by 10.48%.

Related papers

• RelRepair: Enhancing Automated Program Repair by Retrieving Relevant Code [11.74568238259256]
  RelRepair retrieves relevant project-specific code to enhance automated program repair.<n>We evaluate RelRepair on two widely studied datasets, Defects4J V1.2 and ManySStuBs4J.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-09-20T14:07:28Z)
• Large Language Model Hacking: Quantifying the Hidden Risks of Using LLMs for Text Annotation [66.84286617519258]
  Large language models are transforming social science research by enabling the automation of labor-intensive tasks like data annotation and text analysis.<n>Such variation can introduce systematic biases and random errors, which propagate to downstream analyses and cause Type I (false positive), Type II (false negative), Type S (wrong sign), or Type M (exaggerated effect) errors.<n>We find that intentional LLM hacking is strikingly simple. By replicating 37 data annotation tasks from 21 published social science studies, we show that, with just a handful of prompt paraphrases, virtually anything can be presented as statistically significant.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-09-10T17:58:53Z)
• Grammar-Guided Evolutionary Search for Discrete Prompt Optimisation [63.97051732013936]
  We propose an evolutionary search approach to automated discrete prompt optimisation consisting of two phases.<n>In the first phase, grammar-guided genetic programming is invoked to synthesise prompt-creating programmes.<n>In the second phase, local search is applied to explore the neighbourhoods of best-performing programmes.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-07-14T14:34:15Z)
• Specification-Guided Repair of Arithmetic Errors in Dafny Programs using LLMs [84.30534714651093]
  We present an innovative APR tool for Dafny, a verification-aware programming language.<n>We localize faults through a series of steps, which include using Hoare Logic to determine the state of each statement within the program.<n>We evaluate our approach using DafnyBench, a benchmark of real-world Dafny programs.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-07-04T15:36:12Z)
• MCTS-Refined CoT: High-Quality Fine-Tuning Data for LLM-Based Repository Issue Resolution [18.314436803012434]
  The paper proposes MCTS-INE, an enhanced Monte Carlo Tree Search (MCTS)-based algorithm that dynamically validates and optimize intermediate reasoning steps.<n> Experiments on SWE-bench Lite and SWE-bench Verified demonstrate that LLMs fine-tuned with our CoT dataset achieve substantial improvements over baselines.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-06-15T05:42:01Z)
• Fewer Hallucinations, More Verification: A Three-Stage LLM-Based Framework for ASR Error Correction [4.304383298057423]
  We propose the Reliable Correction Framework (RLLM-CF), which consists of three stages: error pre-detection, chain-of-thought sub-tasks iterative correction, and reasoning process verification.<n>Experiments on AISHELL-1, AISHELL-2, and Librispeech show that the GPT-4o model enhanced by our framework achieves 21%, 11%, 9%, and 11.4% relative reductions in CER/WER.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-05-30T08:40:49Z)
• Everything You Wanted to Know About LLM-based Vulnerability Detection But Were Afraid to Ask [30.819697001992154]
  Large Language Models are a promising tool for automated vulnerability detection.<n>Despite widespread adoption, a critical question remains: Are LLMs truly effective at detecting real-world vulnerabilities?<n>This paper challenges three widely held community beliefs: that LLMs are (i) unreliable, (ii) insensitive to code patches, and (iii) performance-plateaued across model scales.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-04-18T05:32:47Z)
• LLM2: Let Large Language Models Harness System 2 Reasoning [65.89293674479907]
  Large language models (LLMs) have exhibited impressive capabilities across a myriad of tasks, yet they occasionally yield undesirable outputs.<n>We introduce LLM2, a novel framework that combines an LLM with a process-based verifier.<n>LLMs2 is responsible for generating plausible candidates, while the verifier provides timely process-based feedback to distinguish desirable and undesirable outputs.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-12-29T06:32:36Z)
• A Real-World Benchmark for Evaluating Fine-Grained Issue Solving Capabilities of Large Language Models [11.087034068992653]
  FAUN-Eval is a benchmark specifically designed to evaluate the Fine-grAined issUe solviNg capabilities of LLMs.<n>It is constructed using a dataset curated from 30 well-known GitHub repositories.<n>We evaluate ten LLMs with FAUN-Eval, including four closed-source and six open-source models.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-11-27T03:25:44Z)
• Instruct or Interact? Exploring and Eliciting LLMs' Capability in Code Snippet Adaptation Through Prompt Engineering [19.019004855931676]
  Large language models (LLMs) have confirmed their effectiveness in the code generation task with promising results. Their performance on adaptation, a reuse-oriented and context-dependent code change prediction task, is still unclear. We propose an interactive prompting approach to elicit LLMs' adaptation ability.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-11-23T09:40:36Z)
• What's Wrong with Your Code Generated by Large Language Models? An Extensive Study [80.18342600996601]
  Large language models (LLMs) produce code that is shorter yet more complicated as compared to canonical solutions. We develop a taxonomy of bugs for incorrect codes that includes three categories and 12 sub-categories, and analyze the root cause for common bug types. We propose a novel training-free iterative method that introduces self-critique, enabling LLMs to critique and correct their generated code based on bug types and compiler feedback.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-07-08T17:27:17Z)
• Towards Large Language Model Aided Program Refinement [10.089955747110444]
  Program refinement involves correctness-preserving transformations from formal high-level specification statements into executable programs. Large language models (LLMs) enable automatic code generations from informal natural language specifications. We propose LLM4PR, a tool that combines formal program refinement techniques with informal LLM-based methods.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-26T04:29:27Z)
• What Did I Do Wrong? Quantifying LLMs' Sensitivity and Consistency to Prompt Engineering [8.019873464066308]
  We introduce two metrics for classification tasks, namely sensitivity and consistency.<n> sensitivity measures changes of predictions across rephrasings of the prompt.<n>Instead, consistency measures how predictions vary across rephrasings for elements of the same class.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-18T06:59:24Z)
• PECC: Problem Extraction and Coding Challenges [3.287942619833188]
  We introduce PECC, a novel benchmark derived from Advent Of Code (AoC) challenges and Project Euler. Unlike conventional benchmarks, PECC requires LLMs to interpret narrative-embedded problems, extract requirements, and generate code. Results show varying model performance between narrative and neutral problems, with specific challenges in the Euler math-based subset.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-04-29T15:02:14Z)
• Aligning the Objective of LLM-based Program Repair [14.935596175148586]
  This paper investigates a new approach to adapt large language models (LLMs) to program repair.<n>Our core insight is that LLM's APR capability can be greatly improved by simply aligning the output to their training objective.<n>Based on this insight, we designed D4C, a straightforward prompting framework for APR.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-04-13T02:36:40Z)
• Enchanting Program Specification Synthesis by Large Language Models using Static Analysis and Program Verification [15.686651364655958]
  AutoSpec is an automated approach to synthesize specifications for automated program verification. It overcomes the shortcomings of existing work in specification versatility, synthesizing satisfiable and adequate specifications for full proof. It can be successfully applied to verify the programs in a real-world X509-parser project.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-03-31T18:15:49Z)
• Building Accurate Translation-Tailored LLMs with Language Aware Instruction Tuning [57.323716555996114]
  Off-target translation remains an unsolved problem, especially for low-resource languages. Recent works have either designed advanced prompting strategies to highlight the functionality of translation instructions or exploited the in-context learning ability of LLMs. In this work, we design a two-stage fine-tuning algorithm to improve the instruction-following ability (especially the translation direction) of LLMs.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-03-21T13:47:40Z)
• DeepCode AI Fix: Fixing Security Vulnerabilities with Large Language Models [3.1690235522182104]
  Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly used to solve various programming tasks. We show that the task is difficult as it requires the model to learn long-range code relationships. We propose a technique to address these challenges with a new approach for querying and fine-tuning LLMs.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-02-19T18:35:40Z)
• Prismatic VLMs: Investigating the Design Space of Visually-Conditioned Language Models [73.40350756742231]
  Visually-conditioned language models (VLMs) have seen growing adoption in applications such as visual dialogue, scene understanding, and robotic task planning. Despite the volume of new releases, key design decisions around image preprocessing, architecture, and optimization are under-explored.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-02-12T18:21:14Z)
• LLMRefine: Pinpointing and Refining Large Language Models via Fine-Grained Actionable Feedback [65.84061725174269]
  Recent large language models (LLM) are leveraging human feedback to improve their generation quality. We propose LLMRefine, an inference time optimization method to refine LLM's output. We conduct experiments on three text generation tasks, including machine translation, long-form question answering (QA), and topical summarization. LLMRefine consistently outperforms all baseline approaches, achieving improvements up to 1.7 MetricX points on translation tasks, 8.1 ROUGE-L on ASQA, 2.2 ROUGE-L on topical summarization.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-11-15T19:52:11Z)
• Simultaneous Machine Translation with Large Language Models [51.470478122113356]
  We investigate the possibility of applying Large Language Models to SimulMT tasks. We conducted experiments using the textttLlama2-7b-chat model on nine different languages from the MUST-C dataset. The results show that LLM outperforms dedicated MT models in terms of BLEU and LAAL metrics.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-09-13T04:06:47Z)
• Improving Open Information Extraction with Large Language Models: A Study on Demonstration Uncertainty [52.72790059506241]
  Open Information Extraction (OIE) task aims at extracting structured facts from unstructured text. Despite the potential of large language models (LLMs) like ChatGPT as a general task solver, they lag behind state-of-the-art (supervised) methods in OIE tasks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-09-07T01:35:24Z)
• Information Association for Language Model Updating by Mitigating LM-Logical Discrepancy [68.31760483418901]
  Large Language Models(LLMs) struggle with providing current information due to the outdated pre-training data. Existing methods for updating LLMs, such as knowledge editing and continual fine-tuning, have significant drawbacks in generalizability of new information. We identify the core challenge behind these drawbacks: the LM-logical discrepancy featuring the difference between language modeling probabilities and logical probabilities.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-05-29T19:48:37Z)
• Compress, Then Prompt: Improving Accuracy-Efficiency Trade-off of LLM Inference with Transferable Prompt [96.24800696597707]
  We introduce a new perspective to optimize this trade-off by prompting compressed models. We propose a soft prompt learning method where we expose the compressed model to the prompt learning process. Our experimental analysis suggests our soft prompt strategy greatly improves the performance of the 8x compressed LLaMA-7B model.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-05-17T20:45:13Z)
• LeTI: Learning to Generate from Textual Interactions [60.425769582343506]
  We explore LMs' potential to learn from textual interactions (LETI) that not only check their correctness with binary labels but also pinpoint and explain errors in their outputs through textual feedback. Our focus is the code generation task, where the model produces code based on natural language instructions. LETI iteratively fine-tunes the model, using the objective LM, on a concatenation of natural language instructions, LM-generated programs, and textual feedback.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-05-17T15:53:31Z)
• SatLM: Satisfiability-Aided Language Models Using Declarative Prompting [68.40726892904286]
  We propose a new satisfiability-aided language modeling (SatLM) approach for improving the reasoning capabilities of large language models (LLMs) We use an LLM to generate a declarative task specification rather than an imperative program and leverage an off-the-shelf automated theorem prover to derive the final answer. We evaluate SATLM on 8 different datasets and show that it consistently outperforms program-aided LMs in the imperative paradigm.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-05-16T17:55:51Z)
• Towards Generating Functionally Correct Code Edits from Natural Language Issue Descriptions [11.327913840111378]
  We introduce Defects4J-NL2Fix, a dataset of 283 Java programs from the popular Defects4J dataset augmented with high-level descriptions of bug fixes. We empirically evaluate the performance of several state-of-the-art LLMs for the this task.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-04-07T18:58:33Z)
• Check Your Facts and Try Again: Improving Large Language Models with External Knowledge and Automated Feedback [127.75419038610455]
  Large language models (LLMs) are able to generate human-like, fluent responses for many downstream tasks. This paper proposes a LLM-Augmenter system, which augments a black-box LLM with a set of plug-and-play modules.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-02-24T18:48:43Z)

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.