arXiv preprint ·
MARQ: A Modular, LLM-Agnostic Requirement Quality Assessor Infused with Systems Engineering Knowledge
- Published
- Source
- arXiv preprint, posted before peer review
- Original
- Read it at arXiv
- Topics
Abstract
Requirements engineering (RE) is foundational to systems engineering (SE), as requirement defects can propagate downstream and adversely affect development outcomes. Although large language models (LLMs) are promising for requirement quality assessment, prior work shows that off-the-shelf models miss a large share of expert-identified defects, perform unevenly across quality criteria, and vary across executions. This study investigates whether infusing expert-derived SE knowledge can improve LLM-based requirement quality evaluation beyond off-the-shelf capability. We present MARQ, a modular, LLM-agnostic prototype that supplements LLMs with a criterion-specific knowledge stack operationalizing INCOSE requirement quality criteria and evaluated against off-the-shelf baselines on an expert-labeled NASA requirement set using Claude Opus 5, GPT-5.6 Sol, and the open-weight Gemma 3 12B, with 100 executions per model. MARQ achieves median F1 scores of 0.80 for Claude Opus 5, 0.62 for GPT-5.6 Sol, and 0.53 for Gemma 3 12B, compared with off-the-shelf baselines of 0.55, 0.52, and 0.18, respectively. However, the nature of these gains is model-dependent. Claude Opus 5 improves defect detection and false-alarm control; GPT-5.6 Sol gains detection and better execution-level consistency at the cost of more false alarms; and Gemma 3 12B reaches the performance of off-the-shelf proprietary models, although it remains highly variable. Criterion-level analysis shows gains concentrated in Correctness and Conformance, trade-offs between misses and false alarms within individual criteria, and model-dependent responses across several criteria. These findings position SE knowledge infusion as a promising model-agnostic pathway for strengthening trustworthy LLM-based RE support while underscoring the need for criterion-specific interventions and human-in-the-loop review.
The authors’ abstract, as arXiv lists it. arXiv’s listings, abstracts included, are free for anyone to reuse.
Read it on ReadSearch
Each opens after you create an account, and brings you back to this paper.
More in Artificial Intelligence
Thinking-in-Bets at Test Time Reduces Sycophantic Revisions in LLM Agents
ProCerDCL: Query-Efficient Black-Box Probabilistic Verification of Deep Learning Compiler Optimization
The Physical Cost of Context: Quality-Constrained Resource Accounting for Coding Agents
From Ripple to Boundary: Deterministic Impact Boundaries for LLM-Based Software Evolution
Arya Forge: Auditing Validation and Release Approval for Financial Instruction Data
Get the few papers worth your time in Artificial Intelligence every morning.
ReadSearch reads the new papers in your field each day and brings you the few worth reading, each with its key finding in a sentence.