Search papers, labs, and topics across Lattice.
This study evaluates the performance of LLM-based dialogue assistants in assessing Non-Functional Requirements (NFRs) related to HIPAA compliance through multi-turn interactions with developers. By employing 49 programmers to interact with GitHub Copilot on 148 NFRs, the research reveals a significant discrepancy between developer agreement with LLM outputs and the accuracy of those outputs against expert ground truth. Notably, while longer and more informative responses from the LLM correlate with lower user satisfaction, proactive interactions enhance the overall experience, highlighting critical design considerations for LLM dialogue systems.
Developers often agree with LLM outputs on NFRs, yet the accuracy of these assessments is alarmingly low, revealing a gap in current evaluation methods.
LLM-based dialogue assistants have become mainstream tools for software developers, yet current evaluation benchmarks focus exclusively on functional correctness. This leaves a critical gap in assessing the quality and accuracy of these conversations when handling Non-Functional Requirements (NFRs), which are inherently vague, context-dependent, and involve many parts of a program. Evaluating how well these systems support collaborative reasoning about NFRs requires methods that go beyond single-turn accuracy to capture both the correctness of the system's outputs and the quality of the multi-turn interaction. In this paper, we investigate the accuracy and quality of multi-turn conversations between developers and an LLM-based agent in the domain of Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA) regulatory compliance. We hired 49 programmers to interact with GitHub Copilot to assess 148 HIPAA-derived NFRs against the iTrust codebase, a system designed to comply with HIPAA regulations, across three dimensions: requirement satisfaction level, reasoning, and code localization. We find that developers tend to agree with LLM assessments, but accuracy against expert ground truth is low. We model user satisfaction and find that longer system responses and more information-providing turns negatively affect user satisfaction, whereas proactive interactions positively affect it. Our findings provide insights for designing LLM-based dialogue systems that support NFR assessment.
