mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

QUARE: Quality-Aware Requirements Analysis through Multi-Agent Dialectical Negotiation

arXiv 2603.11890 ↗First posted 12 Mar 2026cs.SEcited by 0

On the map: LLM agents and tool use → Software engineering coding agents

Abstract (arXiv)

Automating requirements quality analysis remains challenging because multiple, often conflicting quality attributes must be balanced while preserving stakeholder intent. Existing Large-Language-Model (LLM) approaches predominantly rely on task-oriented decomposition or implicit aggregation, limiting their ability to systematically surface and resolve cross-quality conflicts. We present QUARE (QUality-Aware REquirements Analysis), a multi-agent framework that takes a project description as input and formulates requirements quality analysis as structured negotiation among five quality-specialized agents: Safety, Efficiency, Green, Trustworthiness, and Responsibility, coordinated by a dedicated orchestrator. QUARE introduces a dialectical negotiation protocol that explicitly exposes inter-quality conflicts and resolves them through iterative proposal, critique, and synthesis. Negotiated outcomes are transformed into structurally sound KAOS goal models via topology validation and verified against industry standards through retrieval-augmented generation (RAG). We evaluate QUARE on five benchmark systems drawn from established RE benchmarks, MARE and iReDev, and an industrial autonomous-driving specification, spanning safety-critical, financial, and information-system domains. Results show that QUARE achieves 98.2% compliance coverage, a 105% improvement over both baselines; 94.9% semantic preservation, a 2.3 percentage-point improvement over the best baseline; and high verifiability, with a score of 4.96 out of 5.0, while generating 25-43% more requirements than existing multi-agent RE frameworks. These findings suggest that, when using capable instruction-tuned models, architectural choices such as quality-dimension decomposition, explicit negotiation, and automated verification may contribute more to output quality than model scale alone.

Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026). Placed in Software engineering coding agents, one of 16 directions in LLM agents and tool use. Builds on 14 of its 28 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 12 Mar 2026.

Builds on

14 of 28 references.

Closest ancestors · 2

Same direction, newest first

  1. 2025Multi-Agent Debate Strategies to Enhance Requirements Engineering with Large Language Models8 Jul
  2. 2024MARE: Multi-Agents Collaboration Framework for Requirements Engineering6 May

Other references · 12

  1. 2023MetaGPT: Meta Programming for A Multi-Agent Collaborative Frameworkcited by 1,808
  2. 2023Improving Factuality and Reasoning in Language Models through Multiagent Debatecited by 1,784
  3. 2023Encouraging Divergent Thinking in Large Language Models through Multi-Agent Debatecited by 1,011
  4. 2024Same Task, More Tokens: the Impact of Input Length on the Reasoning Performance of Large Language Modelscited by 152
  5. 2018Baidu Apollo EM Motion Plannercited by 100
  6. 2023A Systematic Review of Green AIcited by 77
  7. 2023Advancing Requirements Engineering through Generative AI: Assessing the Role of LLMscited by 42
  8. 2023Investigating ChatGPT's Potential to Assist in Requirements Elicitation Processescited by 25
  9. 2016Rapid quality assurance with Requirements Smellscited by 12
  10. 2024Generative AI for Requirements Engineering: A Systematic Literature Reviewcited by 11
  11. 2016Naming the Pain in Requirements Engineering: Contemporary Problems, Causes, and Effects in Practicecited by 7
  12. 2025iReDev: A Knowledge-Driven Multi-Agent Framework for Intelligent Requirements Developmentcited by 6

Built on by

Not cited yet.

Similar, not cited

Close in wording, no citation either way

  1. 2026ArgRE: Formal Argumentation for Conflict Resolution in Multi-Agent Requirements Negotiation
  2. 2025The Software Engineering Simulations Lab: Agentic AI for RE Quality Simulations
  3. 2026Two Truths and A Lie? Benchmarking Off-the-Shelf LLMs for Requirements Quality Assessment: Performance, False Alarms, and Misses ↗
  4. 2026Agent4RE: A Self-Refining Multi-agent Framework for End-to-End Software Requirements Engineering and Benchmarking
  5. 2026A Large-Scale Empirical Study of Quality Assurance Practices and Gaps in AI Agents
  6. 2026Bridging Requirements and Architecture: Multi-Agent Orchestration with External Knowledge and Hierarchical Memory
  7. 2026From Obligation to Specification: A Survey on Validating EU AI Act Requirements in RE
  8. 2025Requirements Development and Formalization for Reliable Code Generation: A Multi-Agent Vision