mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

Clarity Is Not Assumed: Understanding LLM-Based Code Generation under Ambiguous Requirements

arXiv 2604.21505 ↗First posted 23 Apr 2026cs.SEcited by 3

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Software requirement ambiguity is ubiquitous in real-world development, stemming from the inherent imprecision of natural language and the varying interpretations of stakeholders. While Large Language Models (LLMs) have demonstrated impressive capabilities in generating code from precise specifications, such ambiguity poses a significant obstacle to reliable automated code generation. Existing benchmarks typically assume clear and unambiguous requirements, leaving an empirical gap in understanding how LLMs behave when faced with the inherent uncertainty of real-world software requirements. In this paper, we introduce Orchid, the first code generation benchmark specifically designed with ambiguous requirements. It comprises 1,304 function-level tasks covering four distinct types of ambiguity: lexical, syntactic, semantic, and vagueness. Leveraging this dataset, we conduct the first systematic empirical study to evaluate the impact of requirement ambiguity on LLM-based code generation. Our results demonstrate that ambiguity consistently degrades the performance of all evaluated LLMs, with the most pronounced negative effects observed in highly advanced models. Furthermore, we observe that LLMs frequently produce functionally divergent implementations for the same ambiguous requirement and lack the capability to identify or resolve such ambiguity autonomously. These findings reveal a significant performance gap between clear and ambiguous requirements, underscoring the urgent need for ambiguity-aware techniques in the next generation of automated software engineering tools. The Orchid benchmark is publicly available at https://huggingface.co/datasets/SII-YDD/Orchid.

Key facts. Cited by 3 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). First posted on arXiv 23 Apr 2026.

Builds on

No reference list yet.

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 14 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2026: 3.

3 papers.