mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

How Effective are Generative Large Language Models in Performing Requirements Classification?

arXiv 2504.16768 ↗First posted 23 Apr 2025cs.CL cs.AI cs.SEcited by 1

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

In recent years, transformer-based large language models (LLMs) have revolutionised natural language processing (NLP), with generative models opening new possibilities for tasks that require context-aware text generation. Requirements engineering (RE) has also seen a surge in the experimentation of LLMs for different tasks, including trace-link detection, regulatory compliance, and others. Requirements classification is a common task in RE. While non-generative LLMs like BERT have been successfully applied to this task, there has been limited exploration of generative LLMs. This gap raises an important question: how well can generative LLMs, which produce context-aware outputs, perform in requirements classification? In this study, we explore the effectiveness of three generative LLMs-Bloom, Gemma, and Llama-in performing both binary and multi-class requirements classification. We design an extensive experimental study involving over 400 experiments across three widely used datasets (PROMISE NFR, Functional-Quality, and SecReq). Our study concludes that while factors like prompt design and LLM architecture are universally important, others-such as dataset variations-have a more situational impact, depending on the complexity of the classification task. This insight can guide future model development and deployment strategies, focusing on optimising prompt structures and aligning model architectures with task-specific needs for improved performance.

Key facts. Cited by 1 paper in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 26 of its 67 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 23 Apr 2025.

Builds on

26 of 67 references.

References · 26

  1. 2017Attention Is All You Needcited by 60,361
  2. 2018BERT: Pre-training of Deep Bidirectional Transformers for Language Understandingcited by 40,399
  3. 2020Language Models are Few-Shot Learnerscited by 32,419
  4. 2023GPT-4 Technical Reportcited by 18,396
  5. 2019Exploring the Limits of Transfer Learning with a Unified Text-to-Text Transformercited by 14,599
  6. 2023LLaMA: Open and Efficient Foundation Language Modelscited by 14,132
  7. 2019BERTScore: Evaluating Text Generation with BERTcited by 5,512
  8. 2022Large Language Models are Zero-Shot Reasonerscited by 4,374
  9. 2021Finetuned Language Models Are Zero-Shot Learnerscited by 3,780
  10. 2013Distributed Representations of Words and Phrases and their Compositionalitycited by 3,474
  11. 2023Code Llama: Open Foundation Models for Codecited by 2,139
  12. 2022BLOOM: A 176B-Parameter Open-Access Multilingual Language Modelcited by 1,984
14 more
  1. 2023GQA: Training Generalized Multi-Query Transformer Models from Multi-Head Checkpointscited by 1,346
  2. 2023StarCoder: may the source be with you!cited by 799
  3. 2019Fast Transformer Decoding: One Write-Head is All You Needcited by 717
  4. 2023A Prompt Pattern Catalog to Enhance Prompt Engineering with ChatGPTcited by 619
  5. 2017Zero-Shot Relation Extraction via Reading Comprehensioncited by 426
  6. 2023State of What Art? A Call for Multi-Prompt LLM Evaluationcited by 310
  7. 2019Benchmarking Zero-shot Text Classification: Datasets, Evaluation and Entailment Approachcited by 308
  8. 2020A Review of Generalized Zero-Shot Learning Methodscited by 159
  9. 2020Code and Named Entity Recognition in StackOverflowcited by 39
  10. 2017Train Once, Test Anywhere: Zero-Shot Learning for Text Classificationcited by 22
  11. 2023Requirements Engineering using Generative AI: Prompts and Prompting Patternscited by 13
  12. 2023Zero-Shot Learning for Requirements Classification: An Exploratory Studycited by 9
  13. 2016Are "Non-functional" Requirements really Non-functional?cited by 8
  14. 2017What Works Better? A Study of Classifying Requirementscited by 6

Built on by

Cited by year

Citing papers per year: 2025: 1.

1 paper.