When LLMs Over-Answer: Measuring and Mitigating Quality Issues in LLM-Based Hardware Description Language Question Answering

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2607.17063v2
• Date: Fri, 24 Jul 2026 05:48:22 GMT
• Title: When LLMs Over-Answer: Measuring and Mitigating Quality Issues in LLM-Based Hardware Description Language Question Answering
• Abstract summary: We collect 6,246 HDL Q&A posts with accepted answers from Stack Overflow.<n>We design a user study conducted with 19 HDL engineers with one to three years of experience.<n>We propose a multi-agent framework for improving LLM-based HDL question answering.
• Score: 20.23990268517905
• License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
• Abstract: The rapid advancement of large language models (LLMs) has led practitioners to increasingly rely on them for answering questions about hardware description languages (HDLs). Because HDL is ultimately synthesized into physical hardware, an imprecise or redundant answer can propagate into timing violations or non-synthesizable logic that surface only late in the design flow, making the quality of HDL answers especially consequential. However, the quality of LLM-generated responses, particularly in comparison with answers provided by human experts, remains unclear. To investigate this question, we collect 6,246 HDL Q&A posts with accepted answers from Stack Overflow and curate them into a dataset, organized into a taxonomy of four main categories (Conceptual, Debugging, Generation, and Optimization) and ten subcategories. Using this dataset, we design a user study conducted with 19 HDL engineers with one to three years of experience. Our findings reveal a pervasive over answering tendency: LLMs supply correct content but bury it under redundant alternatives (65.7%) and verbose padding (69.1%), while nearly half of answers (49.0%) fail to fully align with expert answers yet participants still preferred LLM responses for readability (58.3%). Motivated by these findings, we propose a multi-agent framework for improving LLM-based HDL question answering. We evaluate answer quality using an LLM-as-Judge and two structural metrics: the number of core answers, which reflects redundancy since LLMs often provide multiple alternative solutions, and the length of non-core content, which reflects verbosity. Evaluated on the four mainstream LLMs, our framework increases the average core-answer quality score from 3.71 to 4.67 (+0.96) and the non-core content quality from 3.72 to 4.23 (+0.51), on a five-point scale.

Related papers

• It is Too Many Options: Pitfalls of Multiple-Choice Questions in Generative AI and Medical Education [0.7771252627207672]
  The performance of Large Language Models (LLMs) on multiple-choice question (MCQ) benchmarks is frequently cited as proof of their medical capabilities.<n>We created a novel benchmark of free-response questions with paired MCQs (FreeMedQA)<n>Using this benchmark, we evaluated three state-of-the-art LLMs (GPT-4o, GPT-3.5, and LLama-3-70B-instruct) and found an average absolute deterioration of 39.43% in performance on free-response questions.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-03-13T19:42:04Z)
• Are LLMs Aware that Some Questions are not Open-ended? [58.93124686141781]
  We study whether Large Language Models are aware that some questions have limited answers and need to respond more deterministically. The lack of question awareness in LLMs leads to two phenomena: (1) too casual to answer non-open-ended questions or (2) too boring to answer open-ended questions.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-01T06:07:00Z)
• DefAn: Definitive Answer Dataset for LLMs Hallucination Evaluation [39.857198257988685]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) have demonstrated remarkable capabilities, revolutionizing the integration of AI in daily life applications. They are prone to hallucinations, generating claims that contradict established facts, and producing inconsistent responses when the same prompt is presented multiple times. This paper introduces a comprehensive benchmark dataset comprising over 75,000 prompts across eight domains.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-13T14:18:13Z)
• Perception of Knowledge Boundary for Large Language Models through Semi-open-ended Question Answering [67.94354589215637]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) are widely used for knowledge-seeking yet suffer from hallucinations. In this paper, we perceive the LLMs' knowledge boundary (KB) with semi-open-ended questions (SoeQ) We find that GPT-4 performs poorly on SoeQ and is often unaware of its KB. Our auxiliary model, LLaMA-2-13B, is effective in discovering more ambiguous answers.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-05-23T10:00:14Z)
• Reasoning on Efficient Knowledge Paths:Knowledge Graph Guides Large Language Model for Domain Question Answering [18.94220625114711]
  Large language models (LLMs) perform surprisingly well and outperform human experts on many tasks. This paper integrates and optimized a pipeline for selecting reasoning paths from KG based on LLM. We also propose a simple and effective subgraph retrieval method based on chain of thought (CoT) and page rank.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-04-16T08:28:16Z)
• Rephrase and Respond: Let Large Language Models Ask Better Questions for Themselves [57.974103113675795]
  We present a method named Rephrase and Respond' (RaR) which allows Large Language Models to rephrase and expand questions posed by humans. RaR serves as a simple yet effective prompting method for improving performance. We show that RaR is complementary to the popular Chain-of-Thought (CoT) methods, both theoretically and empirically.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-11-07T18:43:34Z)
• Investigating Answerability of LLMs for Long-Form Question Answering [35.41413072729483]
  We focus on long-form question answering (LFQA) because it has several practical and impactful applications. We propose a question-generation method from abstractive summaries and show that generating follow-up questions from summaries of long documents can create a challenging setting.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-09-15T07:22:56Z)
• Question Answering as Programming for Solving Time-Sensitive Questions [84.07553016489769]
  Question answering plays a pivotal role in human daily life because it involves our acquisition of knowledge about the world. Recently, Large Language Models (LLMs) have shown remarkable intelligence in question answering. This can be attributed to the LLMs' inability to perform rigorous reasoning based on surface-level text semantics. We propose a novel approach where we reframe the $textbfQ$uestion $textbfA$rogrogering task.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-05-23T16:35:16Z)
• Statistical Knowledge Assessment for Large Language Models [79.07989821512128]
  Given varying prompts regarding a factoid question, can a large language model (LLM) reliably generate factually correct answers? We propose KaRR, a statistical approach to assess factual knowledge for LLMs. Our results reveal that the knowledge in LLMs with the same backbone architecture adheres to the scaling law, while tuning on instruction-following data sometimes compromises the model's capability to generate factually correct text reliably.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-05-17T18:54:37Z)
• Search-in-the-Chain: Interactively Enhancing Large Language Models with Search for Knowledge-intensive Tasks [121.74957524305283]
  This paper proposes a novel framework named textbfSearch-in-the-Chain (SearChain) for the interaction between Information Retrieval (IR) and Large Language Model (LLM) Experiments show that SearChain outperforms state-of-the-art baselines on complex knowledge-intensive tasks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-04-28T10:15:25Z)
• 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.