Automated Non-Functional Requirements Generation in Software Engineering with Large Language Models: A Comparative Study
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Neglecting non-functional requirements (NFRs) early in software development can lead to critical challenges. Despite their importance, NFRs are often overlooked or difficult to identify, impacting software quality. To support requirements engineers in eliciting NFRs, we developed a framework that leverages Large Language Models (LLMs) to derive quality-driven NFRs from functional requirements (FRs). Using a custom prompting technique within a Deno-based pipeline, the system identifies relevant quality attributes for each functional requirement and generates corresponding NFRs, aiding systematic integration. A crucial aspect is evaluating the quality and suitability of these generated requirements. Can LLMs produce high-quality NFR suggestions? Using 34 functional requirements - selected as a representative subset of 3,964 FRs-the LLMs inferred applicable attributes based on the ISO/IEC 25010:2023 standard, generating 1,593 NFRs. A horizontal evaluation covered three dimensions: NFR validity, applicability of quality attributes, and classification precision. Ten industry software quality evaluators, averaging 13 years of experience, assessed a subset for relevance and quality. The evaluation showed strong alignment between LLM-generated NFRs and expert assessments, with median validity and applicability scores of 5.0 (means: 4.63 and 4.59, respectively) on a 1-5 scale. In the classification task, 80.4% of LLM-assigned attributes matched expert choices, with 8.3% near misses and 11.3% mismatches. A comparative analysis of eight LLMs highlighted variations in performance, with gemini-1.5-pro exhibiting the highest attribute accuracy, while llama-3.3-70B achieved higher validity and applicability scores. These findings provide insights into the feasibility of using LLMs for automated NFR generation and lay the foundation for further exploration of AI-assisted requirements engineering.
Key facts. Cited by 3 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 4 of its 36 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 19 Mar 2025.
Builds on
4 of 36 references.
References · 4
- 2020Language Models are Few-Shot Learnerscited by 32,419
- 2020Exploiting Cloze Questions for Few Shot Text Classification and Natural Language Inferencecited by 938
- 2024Generative AI for Requirements Engineering: A Systematic Literature Reviewcited by 11
- 2024RECOVER: Toward Requirements Generation from Stakeholders' Conversationscited by 6
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2025: 1; 2026: 2.
3 papers.
- 2025SEER: Sustainability Enhanced Engineering of Software Requirementscited by 0
- 2026Reward-Free Code Alignment from Pretrained or Fine-Tuned LLM: Unpacking the Trade-offs for Code Generationcited by 0
- 2026Does ISO-Grounded NFR Specification Improve LLM Code Generation? A Comparison of Rich and Structured Interventions against a Natural-Language Baselinecited by 0
- 2026Does ISO-Grounded NFR Specification Improve LLM Code Generation? A Comparison of Rich and Structured Interventions against a Natural-Language Baseline13 Aug 2026
- 2026Reward-Free Code Alignment from Pretrained or Fine-Tuned LLM: Unpacking the Trade-offs for Code Generation27 Jun 2026
- 2025SEER: Sustainability Enhanced Engineering of Software Requirements10 Oct 2025