SR-Eval: Evaluating LLMs on Code Generation under Stepwise Requirement Refinement
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Large language models (LLMs) have achieved remarkable progress in code generation. However, existing benchmarks mainly formalize the task as a static, single-turn problem, overlooking the stepwise requirement changes and iterative workflows in real-world software development. This mismatch limits the understanding of how well LLMs can support real-world development workflows. Constructing such iterative benchmarks is challenging due to the lack of public interaction traces and the difficulty of creating discriminative, turn-specific test cases. To bridge this gap, we present SR-Eval, a benchmark specifically designed to assess LLMs on iterative code generation under Stepwise requirements Refinement. SR-Eval spans both function-level and repository-level tasks in Python and Java, enabling fine-grained and progressive evaluation across evolving requirements. The construction of SR-Eval follows a carefully designed pipeline that first leverages a multi-agent-based requirement generation method to simulate the development process and recover the multi-round interaction process from final requirements, then employs a semantic-aware discriminative test case generation component to ensure discriminative and consistent evaluation at each turn. SR-Eval comprises 443 multi-turn tasks and 1,857 questions at both function and repository levels. Using SR-Eval, we evaluate 11 representative LLMs with three prompting strategies that simulate different usage patterns. Results show that iterative code generation under stepwise requirement refinement remains highly challenging: the best-performing model achieves only 22.67% completion rate on function-level tasks and 20.00% on repository-level tasks. We further observe that prompting strategies substantially influence performance, highlighting the need for the development of advanced methods.
Key facts. Cited by 5 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). First posted on arXiv 23 Sep 2025.
Builds on
No reference list yet.
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2026: 5.
5 papers.
- 2026SlopCodeBench: Benchmarking How Coding Agents Degrade Over Long-Horizon Iterative Taskscited by 30
- 2026SWE-INTERACT: Reimagining SWE Benchmarks as User-Driven Long-Horizon Coding Sessionscited by 11
- 2026ClarEval: A Benchmark for Evaluating Clarification Skills of Code Agents under Ambiguous Instructionscited by 8
- 2026When the Specification Emerges: Benchmarking Faithfulness Loss in Long-Horizon Coding Agentscited by 6
- 2026Imperfect Visual Verification for Code Edition : A Case Study on TikZcited by 0
- 2026SWE-INTERACT: Reimagining SWE Benchmarks as User-Driven Long-Horizon Coding Sessions29 Jun 2026
- 2026Imperfect Visual Verification for Code Edition : A Case Study on TikZ9 Apr 2026
- 2026SlopCodeBench: Benchmarking How Coding Agents Degrade Over Long-Horizon Iterative Tasks25 Mar 2026
- 2026When the Specification Emerges: Benchmarking Faithfulness Loss in Long-Horizon Coding Agents17 Mar 2026
- 2026ClarEval: A Benchmark for Evaluating Clarification Skills of Code Agents under Ambiguous Instructions27 Feb 2026