Asking What Matters: Reward-Driven Clarification for Software Engineering Tasks

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.14624v1
• Date: Thu, 16 Apr 2026 05:11:02 GMT
• Title: Asking What Matters: Reward-Driven Clarification for Software Engineering Tasks
• Abstract summary: We quantify which types of information most affect task success and which questions elicit useful responses from simulated users.<n>Using Shapley attribution and distributional comparisons, we identify two key properties of effective clarification: task relevance (which information predicts success) and user answerability.<n>We operationalize these properties as multi-stage reinforcement learning rewards to train CLARITI, an 8B- parameter clarification module, that matches GPT-5's resolution rate on underspecified issues.
• Score: 49.47167381167488
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: Humans often specify tasks incompletely, so assistants must know when and how to ask clarifying questions. However, effective clarification remains challenging in software engineering tasks as not all missing information is equally valuable, and questions must target information users can realistically provide. We study clarification in real software engineering tasks by quantifying which types of information most affect task success and which questions elicit useful responses from simulated users. Using Shapley attribution and distributional comparisons, we identify two key properties of effective clarification: task relevance (which information predicts success) and user answerability (what users can realistically provide). We operationalize these properties as multi-stage reinforcement learning rewards to train CLARITI, an 8B-parameter clarification module, that matches GPT-5's resolution rate on underspecified issues while generating 41% fewer questions. Our results suggest that grounding reward design in empirical analysis of information impact and user answerability improves clarification efficiency.

Related papers

• Teaching Language Models To Gather Information Proactively [53.85419549904644]
  Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly expected to function as collaborative partners.<n>In this work, we introduce a new task paradigm: proactive information gathering.<n>We design a scalable framework that generates partially specified, real-world tasks, masking key information.<n>Within this setup, our core innovation is a reinforcement finetuning strategy that rewards questions that elicit genuinely new, implicit user information.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-07-28T23:50:09Z)
• Exploring the Generalizability of Factual Hallucination Mitigation via Enhancing Precise Knowledge Utilization [49.95746521480879]
  We introduce PKUE (Precise Knowledge Utilization Enhancement), which fine-tunes the model on self-generated responses to precise and simple factual questions.<n>Extensive experiments demonstrate that PKUE significantly improves LLM overall performance.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-02-26T13:34:52Z)
• Interactive Agents to Overcome Ambiguity in Software Engineering [61.40183840499932]
  AI agents are increasingly being deployed to automate tasks, often based on ambiguous and underspecified user instructions.<n>Making unwarranted assumptions and failing to ask clarifying questions can lead to suboptimal outcomes.<n>We study the ability of LLM agents to handle ambiguous instructions in interactive code generation settings by evaluating proprietary and open-weight models on their performance.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-02-18T17:12:26Z)
• Uncertainty of Thoughts: Uncertainty-Aware Planning Enhances Information Seeking in Large Language Models [73.79091519226026]
  Uncertainty of Thoughts (UoT) is an algorithm to augment large language models with the ability to actively seek information by asking effective questions. In experiments on medical diagnosis, troubleshooting, and the 20 Questions game, UoT achieves an average performance improvement of 38.1% in the rate of successful task completion.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-02-05T18:28:44Z)
• Active Instruction Tuning: Improving Cross-Task Generalization by Training on Prompt Sensitive Tasks [101.40633115037983]
  Instruction tuning (IT) achieves impressive zero-shot generalization results by training large language models (LLMs) on a massive amount of diverse tasks with instructions. How to select new tasks to improve the performance and generalizability of IT models remains an open question. We propose active instruction tuning based on prompt uncertainty, a novel framework to identify informative tasks, and then actively tune the models on the selected tasks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-11-01T04:40:05Z)
• Alexpaca: Learning Factual Clarification Question Generation Without Examples [19.663171923249283]
  We present a new task that focuses on the ability to elicit missing information in multi-hop reasoning tasks. Humans outperform GPT-4 by a large margin, while Llama 3 8B Instruct does not even beat the dummy baseline in some metrics.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-10-17T20:40:59Z)
• Active Prompting with Chain-of-Thought for Large Language Models [26.5029080638055]
  This paper proposes a new method, Active-Prompt, to adapt large language models to different tasks. By borrowing ideas from the related problem of uncertainty-based active learning, we introduce several metrics to characterize the uncertainty. Experimental results demonstrate the superiority of our proposed method, achieving state-of-the-art on eight complex reasoning tasks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-02-23T18:58:59Z)
• A Dataset of Information-Seeking Questions and Answers Anchored in Research Papers [66.11048565324468]
  We present a dataset of 5,049 questions over 1,585 Natural Language Processing papers. Each question is written by an NLP practitioner who read only the title and abstract of the corresponding paper, and the question seeks information present in the full text. We find that existing models that do well on other QA tasks do not perform well on answering these questions, underperforming humans by at least 27 F1 points when answering them from entire papers.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-05-07T00:12:34Z)
• Stay Hungry, Stay Focused: Generating Informative and Specific Questions in Information-Seeking Conversations [41.74162467619795]
  We investigate the problem of generating informative questions in information-asymmetric conversations. To generate pragmatic questions, we use reinforcement learning to optimize an informativeness metric. We demonstrate that the resulting pragmatic questioner substantially improves the informativeness and specificity of questions generated over a baseline model.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-04-30T00:49:14Z)
• Review-guided Helpful Answer Identification in E-commerce [38.276241153439955]
  Product-specific community question answering platforms can greatly help address the concerns of potential customers. The user-provided answers on such platforms often vary a lot in their qualities. Helpfulness votes from the community can indicate the overall quality of the answer, but they are often missing.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-03-13T11:34:29Z)

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.