Evaluating Large Language Models for Detecting Architectural Decision Violations

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2602.07609v1
• Date: Sat, 07 Feb 2026 16:36:14 GMT
• Title: Evaluating Large Language Models for Detecting Architectural Decision Violations
• Abstract summary: Architectural Decision Records (ADRs) play a central role in maintaining software architecture quality.<n>Recent advances in Large Language Models (LLMs) open up new possibilities for automating architectural reasoning at scale.<n>We investigated how effectively LLMs can identify decision violations in open-source systems by examining their agreement, accuracy, and inherent limitations.
• Score: 39.480626944948376
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: Architectural Decision Records (ADRs) play a central role in maintaining software architecture quality, yet many decision violations go unnoticed because projects lack both systematic documentation and automated detection mechanisms. Recent advances in Large Language Models (LLMs) open up new possibilities for automating architectural reasoning at scale. We investigated how effectively LLMs can identify decision violations in open-source systems by examining their agreement, accuracy, and inherent limitations. Our study analyzed 980 ADRs across 109 GitHub repositories using a multi-model pipeline in which one LLM primary screens potential decision violations, and three additional LLMs independently validate the reasoning. We assessed agreement, accuracy, precision, and recall, and complemented the quantitative findings with expert evaluation. The models achieved substantial agreement and strong accuracy for explicit, code-inferable decisions. Accuracy falls short for implicit or deployment-oriented decisions that depend on deployment configuration or organizational knowledge. Therefore, LLMs can meaningfully support validation of architectural decision compliance; however, they are not yet replacing human expertise for decisions not focused on code.

Related papers

• Decision-Centric Design for LLM Systems [3.400316337034188]
  We propose a decision-centric framework that separates decision-relevant signals from the policy that maps them to actions.<n>This separation supports attribution of failures to signal estimation, decision policy, or execution.<n>Across three experiments, the framework reduces futile actions, improves task success, and reveals interpretable failure modes.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-04-01T02:57:23Z)
• Reasoning with Confidence: Efficient Verification of LLM Reasoning Steps via Uncertainty Heads [104.9566359759396]
  We propose a lightweight alternative for step-level reasoning verification based on data-driven uncertainty scores.<n>Our findings suggest that the internal states of LLMs encode their uncertainty and can serve as reliable signals for reasoning verification.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-11-09T03:38:29Z)
• Evaluating LLM Understanding via Structured Tabular Decision Simulations [19.626373589153108]
  Large language models (LLMs) often achieve impressive predictive accuracy, yet correctness alone does not imply genuine understanding.<n>We introduce Structured Tabular Decision Simulations (STaDS), a suite of expert-like decision settings.<n>We analyze 9 frontier LLMs across 15 diverse decision settings.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-11-07T09:42:39Z)
• DecisionFlow: Advancing Large Language Model as Principled Decision Maker [49.088778182807395]
  DecisionFlow is a novel decision modeling framework that guides models to reason over structured representations of actions, attributes, and constraints.<n>Rather than predicting answers directly from prompts, DecisionFlow builds a semantically grounded decision space and infers a latent utility function.<n> Empirical results show that DecisionFlow achieves up to 30% accuracy gains over strong prompting baselines.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-05-27T16:23:53Z)
• Integrating Expert Knowledge into Logical Programs via LLMs [3.637365301757111]
  ExKLoP is a framework designed to evaluate how effectively Large Language Models integrate expert knowledge into logical reasoning systems.<n>This capability is especially valuable in engineering, where expert knowledge-such as manufacturer-recommended operational ranges-can be directly embedded into automated monitoring systems.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-02-17T19:18:23Z)
• Embodied Agent Interface: Benchmarking LLMs for Embodied Decision Making [85.24399869971236]
  We aim to evaluate Large Language Models (LLMs) for embodied decision making.<n>Existing evaluations tend to rely solely on a final success rate.<n>We propose a generalized interface (Embodied Agent Interface) that supports the formalization of various types of tasks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-09T17:59:00Z)
• Cognitive LLMs: Towards Integrating Cognitive Architectures and Large Language Models for Manufacturing Decision-making [51.737762570776006]
  LLM-ACTR is a novel neuro-symbolic architecture that provides human-aligned and versatile decision-making. Our framework extracts and embeds knowledge of ACT-R's internal decision-making process as latent neural representations. Our experiments on novel Design for Manufacturing tasks show both improved task performance as well as improved grounded decision-making capability.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-08-17T11:49:53Z)
• DeLLMa: Decision Making Under Uncertainty with Large Language Models [31.77731889916652]
  DeLLMa is a framework designed to enhance decision-making accuracy in uncertain environments. We show that DeLLMa can consistently enhance the decision-making performance of leading language models, and achieve up to a 40% increase in accuracy over competing methods.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-02-04T08:11:45Z)
• Leveraging Expert Consistency to Improve Algorithmic Decision Support [62.61153549123407]
  We explore the use of historical expert decisions as a rich source of information that can be combined with observed outcomes to narrow the construct gap. We propose an influence function-based methodology to estimate expert consistency indirectly when each case in the data is assessed by a single expert. Our empirical evaluation, using simulations in a clinical setting and real-world data from the child welfare domain, indicates that the proposed approach successfully narrows the construct gap.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-01-24T05:40:29Z)

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.