Large language models (LLMs) can be employed for automating the generation of software requirements from natural language inputs such as the transcripts of elicitation interviews. However, evaluating whether those derived requirements faithfully reflect the stakeholders' needs remains a largely manual task. We introduce Text2Stories, a task and metrics for text-to-story alignment that allow quantifying the extent to which requirements (in the form of user stories) match the actual needs expressed by the elicitation session participants. Given an interview transcript and a set of user stories, our metric quantifies (i) correctness: the proportion of stories supported by the transcript, and (ii) completeness: the proportion of transcript supported by at least one story. We segment the transcript into text chunks and instantiate the alignment as a matching problem between chunks and stories. Experiments over four datasets show that an LLM-based matcher achieves 0.86 macro-F1 on held-out annotations, while embedding models alone remain behind but enable effective blocking. Finally, we show how our metrics enable the comparison across sets of stories (e.g., human vs. generated), positioning Text2Stories as a scalable, source-faithful complement to existing user-story quality criteria.

User stories are essential in agile development, yet often missing or outdated in legacy and poorly documented systems. We investigate whether large language models (LLMs) can automatically recover user stories directly from source code and how prompt design impacts output quality. Using 1,750 annotated C++ snippets of varying complexity, we evaluate five state-of-the-art LLMs across six prompting strategies. Results show that all models achieve, on average, an F1 score of 0.8 for code up to 200 NLOC. Our findings show that a single illustrative example enables the smallest model (8B) to match the performance of a much larger 70B model. In contrast, structured reasoning via Chain-of-Thought offers only marginal gains, primarily for larger models.

--Incorporating ethics into the requirement elicitation process is essential for creating ethically aligned systems. Although eliciting manual ethics requirements is effective, it requires diverse input from multiple stakeholders, which can be challenging due to time and resource constraints. Moreover, it is often given a low priority in the requirements elicitation process. This study proposes a framework for generating ethics requirements drafts by introducing an ethics advocate agent in a multi-agent LLM setting. This agent critiques and provides input on ethical issues based on the system description. The proposed framework is evaluated through two case studies from different contexts, demonstrating that it captures the majority of ethics requirements identified by researchers during 30-minute interviews and introduces several additional relevant requirements. However, it also highlights reliability issues in generating ethics requirements, emphasizing the need for human feedback in this sensitive domain. We believe this work can facilitate the broader adoption of ethics in the requirements engineering process, ultimately leading to more ethically aligned products. Artificial intelligence (AI) has gained widespread adoption across various domains, including healthcare, finance, education, and marketing.

Large Language Models (LLMs) have shown significant potential for ontology engineering. However, it is still unclear to what extent they are applicable to the task of domain-specific ontology generation. In this study, we explore the application of LLMs for automated ontology generation and evaluate their performance across different domains. Specifically, we investigate the generalizability of two state-of-the-art LLMs, DeepSeek and o1-preview, both equipped with reasoning capabilities, by generating ontologies from a set of competency questions (CQs) and related user stories. Our experimental setup comprises six distinct domains carried out in existing ontology engineering projects and a total of 95 curated CQs designed to test the models' reasoning for ontology engineering. Our findings show that with both LLMs, the performance of the experiments is remarkably consistent across all domains, indicating that these methods are capable of generalizing ontology generation tasks irrespective of the domain. These results highlight the potential of LLM-based approaches in achieving scalable and domain-agnostic ontology construction and lay the groundwork for further research into enhancing automated reasoning and knowledge representation techniques.

AI systems are gaining widespread adoption across various sectors and domains. Creating high-quality AI system requirements is crucial for aligning the AI system with business goals and consumer values and for social responsibility. However, with the uncertain nature of AI systems and the heavy reliance on sensitive data, more research is needed to address the elicitation and analysis of AI systems requirements. With the proprietary nature of many AI systems, there is a lack of open-source requirements artifacts and technical requirements documents for AI systems, limiting broader research and investigation. With Large Language Models (LLMs) emerging as a promising alternative to human-generated text, this paper investigates the potential use of LLMs to generate user stories for AI systems based on abstracts from scholarly papers. We conducted an empirical evaluation using three LLMs and generated $1260$ user stories from $42$ abstracts from $26$ domains. We assess their quality using the Quality User Story (QUS) framework. Moreover, we identify relevant non-functional requirements (NFRs) and ethical principles. Our analysis demonstrates that the investigated LLMs can generate user stories inspired by the needs of various stakeholders, offering a promising approach for generating user stories for research purposes and for aiding in the early requirements elicitation phase of AI systems. We have compiled and curated a collection of stories generated by various LLMs into a dataset (UStAI), which is now publicly available for use.

Competency Questions (CQs) are pivotal in knowledge engineering, guiding the design, validation, and testing of ontologies. A number of diverse formulation approaches have been proposed in the literature, ranging from completely manual to Large Language Model (LLM) driven ones. However, attempts to characterise the outputs of these approaches and their systematic comparison are scarce. This paper presents an empirical comparative evaluation of three distinct CQ formulation approaches: manual formulation by ontology engineers, instantiation of CQ patterns, and generation using state of the art LLMs. We generate CQs using each approach from a set of requirements for cultural heritage, and assess them across different dimensions: degree of acceptability, ambiguity, relevance, readability and complexity. Our contribution is twofold: (i) the first multi-annotator dataset of CQs generated from the same source using different methods; and (ii) a systematic comparison of the characteristics of the CQs resulting from each approach. Our study shows that different CQ generation approaches have different characteristics and that LLMs can be used as a way to initially elicit CQs, however these are sensitive to the model used to generate CQs and they generally require a further refinement step before they can be used to model requirements.

Traditional quality assurance (QA) methods face significant challenges in addressing the complexity, scale, and rapid iteration cycles of modern software systems and are strained by limited resources available, leading to substantial costs associated with poor quality. The object of this research is the Quality Assurance processes for modern distributed software applications. The subject of the research is the assessment of the benefits, challenges, and prospects of integrating modern AI-oriented tools into quality assurance processes. We performed comprehensive analysis of implications on both verification and validation processes covering exploratory test analyses, equivalence partitioning and boundary analyses, metamorphic testing, finding inconsistencies in acceptance criteria (AC), static analyses, test case generation, unit test generation, test suit optimization and assessment, end to end scenario execution. End to end regression of sample enterprise application utilizing AI-agents over generated test scenarios was implemented as a proof of concept highlighting practical use of the study. The results, with only 8.3% flaky executions of generated test cases, indicate significant potential for the proposed approaches. However, the study also identified substantial challenges for practical adoption concerning generation of semantically identical coverage, "black box" nature and lack of explainability from state-of-the-art Large Language Models (LLMs), the tendency to correct mutated test cases to match expected results, underscoring the necessity for thorough verification of both generated artifacts and test execution results. The research demonstrates AI's transformative potential for QA but highlights the importance of a strategic approach to implementing these technologies, considering the identified limitations and the need for developing appropriate verification methodologies.

This research explores the application of Multimodal Generative AI to enhance story point estimation in Agile software development. By integrating text, image, and categorical data using advanced models like BERT, CNN, and XGBoost, our approach surpasses t he limitations of traditional single - modal estimation methods. The results demonstrate strong accuracy for simpler story points, while also highlighting challenges in more complex categories due to data imbalance. This study further explores the impact of categorical data, particularly severity, on the estimation process, emphasizing its influence on model performance. Our findings emphasize the transformative potential of multimodal data integration in refining AI - driven project management, paving the way for more precise, adaptable, and domain - specific AI capabilities. Additionally, this work outlines future direction s for addressing data variability and enhancing the robustness of AI in Agile methodologies.

The broad availability of generative AI offers new opportunities to support various work domains, including agile software development. Agile epics are a key artifact for product managers to communicate requirements to stakeholders. However, in practice, they are often poorly defined, leading to churn, delivery delays, and cost overruns. In this industry case study, we investigate opportunities for large language models (LLMs) to evaluate agile epic quality in a global company. Results from a user study with 17 product managers indicate how LLM evaluations could be integrated into their work practices, including perceived values and usage in improving their epics. High levels of satisfaction indicate that agile epics are a new, viable application of AI evaluations. However, our findings also outline challenges, limitations, and adoption barriers that can inform both practitioners and researchers on the integration of such evaluations into future agile work practices.

Multi-agent autonomous systems (MAS) are better at addressing challenges that spans across multiple domains than singular autonomous agents. This holds true within the field of software engineering (SE) as well. The state-of-the-art research on MAS within SE focuses on integrating LLMs at the core of autonomous agents to create LLM-based multi-agent autonomous (LMA) systems. However, the introduction of LMA systems into SE brings a plethora of challenges. One of the major challenges is the strategic allocation of tasks between humans and the LMA system in a trustworthy manner. To address this challenge, a RACI-based framework is proposed in this work in progress article, along with implementation guidelines and an example implementation of the framework. The proposed framework can facilitate efficient collaboration, ensure accountability, and mitigate potential risks associated with LLM-driven automation while aligning with the Trustworthy AI guidelines. The future steps for this work delineating the planned empirical validation method are also presented.