Prompting GPT-5 on Scrum Certification Questions: An Empirical Accuracy Study

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2607.00049v1
• Date: Mon, 29 Jun 2026 23:55:14 GMT
• Title: Prompting GPT-5 on Scrum Certification Questions: An Empirical Accuracy Study
• Abstract summary: Large Language Models (LLMs) are increasingly used in Agile Software Development for documentation, coaching, and training.<n>This paper examines how different prompt techniques affect the factual accuracy of LLM responses to Scrum certification-style questions.
• Score: 0.6531122829756467
• License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
• Abstract: Large Language Models (LLMs) are increasingly used in Agile Software Development for documentation, coaching, and training. As practitioners adopt these tools to prepare for certifications such as Professional Scrum Master (PSM), a key question is whether LLMs can reliably reason about Scrum, a framework with normative, well-defined rules described in the Scrum Guide (2020). This paper examines how different prompt techniques affect the factual accuracy of LLM responses to Scrum certification-style questions. A dataset of 993 validated PSM-aligned questions was answered by GPT-5 using three techniques: zero-shot, chain-of-thought, and with-source citation. All prompts achieved certification-level accuracy above 85\%, with the citation-based variant performing best (89.1\%) and yielding the lowest error rate. Correct answers concentrated in well-defined topics, such as \emph{Definition of Done}, Events, and Product Backlog Management, and in single-answer multiple-choice items, while multi-select questions and more interpretive areas, such as Scrum Team and Product Value, were less stable. Among questions where at least one prompt failed (16.2\%), errors clustered into misalignment with the Scrum Guide (28\%), content outside its scope (34\%), and outdated or biased interpretations (38\%). Overall, prompt techniques produced modest but consistent improvements, particularly in reducing misinterpretation and version drift, supporting more reliable use of LLMs in Agile learning and certification preparation.

Related papers

• MTAC-IFBench: Benchmarking Instruction-Following in Multi-Turn Agentic Coding [83.0805548642958]
  MTAC-IFBench is a comprehensive benchmark for instruction-following in software development.<n>It features multi-turn progressive software development instructions with diverse constraints spanning 6 primary and 18 secondary categories.<n>MTAC-IFBench identifies significant deficiencies in existing code agents in multi-turn instruction-following, with their performance degrading rapidly as the interaction session grows longer.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-09-14T03:57:37Z)
• Teaching Code LLMs to Reason with Intermediate Formal Specifications [9.552020178028576]
  SpecCoder is a training framework that learns from validated reference programs, behavior-changing mutants, and multi-turn specification-refinement traces.<n> SpecCoder selects specifications that hold on correct executions while rejecting faulty executions, turning specifications from passive annotations into executable evidence.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-07-05T11:09:30Z)
• Comparing Large Language Models on Scrum Certification-Style Questions: Accuracy, Stability, and Error Patterns [0.19674381684480705]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) are increasingly used in exam- and certification-style question answering tasks.<n>This paper evaluates the performance of three contemporary LLMs, textitGPT-5 mini, textitGemini 3 Flash, and textitDeepSeek Chat 3.2, in answering 993 Scrum certification-style questions.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-06-29T23:37:56Z)
• Adoption of Large Language Models in Scrum Management: Insights from Brazilian Practitioners [2.0118771669399327]
  The recent emergence of Large Language Models (LLMs) has created new opportunities to support knowledge-intensive Scrum practices.<n>This study investigates the use of LLMs in Scrum management activities through a survey of 70 Brazilian professionals.<n>The results indicate a high level of proficiency and frequent use of LLMs, with 85% of respondents reporting intermediate or advanced proficiency and 52% using them daily.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-02-09T01:21:23Z)
• Encyclo-K: Evaluating LLMs with Dynamically Composed Knowledge Statements [78.87065404966002]
  Existing benchmarks predominantly curate questions at the question level.<n>We propose Encyclo-K, a statement-based benchmark that rethinks benchmark construction from the ground up.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-12-31T13:55:54Z)
• Anka: A Domain-Specific Language for Reliable LLM Code Generation [0.0]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) exhibit systematic errors on complex, multi-step programming tasks.<n>We introduce Anka, a domain-specific language () for data transformation pipelines designed with explicit, constrained syntax.<n>Anka achieves 99.9% parse success and 95.8% overall task accuracy across 100 benchmark problems.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-12-29T05:28:17Z)
• CompassVerifier: A Unified and Robust Verifier for LLMs Evaluation and Outcome Reward [50.97588334916863]
  We develop CompassVerifier, an accurate and robust lightweight verifier model for evaluation and outcome reward.<n>It demonstrates multi-domain competency spanning math, knowledge, and diverse reasoning tasks, with the capability to process various answer types.<n>We introduce VerifierBench benchmark comprising model outputs collected from multiple data sources, augmented through manual analysis of metaerror patterns to enhance CompassVerifier.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-08-05T17:55:24Z)
• Do AI models help produce verified bug fixes? [62.985237003585674]
  Large Language Models are used to produce corrections to software bugs.<n>This paper investigates how programmers use Large Language Models to complement their own skills.<n>The results are a first step towards a proper role for AI and LLMs in providing guaranteed-correct fixes to program bugs.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-07-21T17:30:16Z)
• Specification-Guided Repair of Arithmetic Errors in Dafny Programs using LLMs [79.74676890436174]
  We present an APR tool for Dafny that uses formal specifications as oracles for fault localization and repair.<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>Our tool achieves 89.6% fault localization coverage and GPT-4o mini yields the highest repair success rate of 74.18%.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-07-04T15:36:12Z)
• 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)
• SORRY-Bench: Systematically Evaluating Large Language Model Safety Refusal [64.9938658716425]
  SORRY-Bench is a proposed benchmark for evaluating large language models' (LLMs) ability to recognize and reject unsafe user requests.<n>First, existing methods often use coarse-grained taxonomy of unsafe topics, and are over-representing some fine-grained topics.<n>Second, linguistic characteristics and formatting of prompts are often overlooked, like different languages, dialects, and more -- which are only implicitly considered in many evaluations.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-20T17:56:07Z)
• Factcheck-Bench: Fine-Grained Evaluation Benchmark for Automatic Fact-checkers [121.53749383203792]
  We present a holistic end-to-end solution for annotating the factuality of large language models (LLMs)-generated responses. We construct an open-domain document-level factuality benchmark in three-level granularity: claim, sentence and document. Preliminary experiments show that FacTool, FactScore and Perplexity are struggling to identify false claims.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-11-15T14:41:57Z)
• Instances Need More Care: Rewriting Prompts for Instances with LLMs in the Loop Yields Better Zero-Shot Performance [11.595274304409937]
  Large language models (LLMs) have revolutionized zero-shot task performance. Current methods using trigger phrases such as "Let's think step by step" remain limited. This study introduces PRomPTed, an approach that optimize the zero-shot prompts for individual task instances.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-10-03T14:51:34Z)

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.