ArticleScientific reports2025
Generating reliable software project task flows using large language models through prompt engineering and robust evaluation.
Article in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Large Language Models (LLMs) offer promising capabilities for converting unstructured software documentation into structured task flows, yet their outputs often lack procedural reliability critical for software engineering. This paper presents a comprehensive framework that benchmarks five leading LLMs-Gemini 2.5 Pro, Grok 3, GPT-Omni, DeepSeek-R1, and LLaMA-3-across five prompting strategies, including Zero-Shot, Chain-of-Thought, and ISO 21502-Guided, using real-world software tutorials from the "Build Your Own X" repository. We introduce the Hybrid Semantic Similarity Metric (HSSM), which combines SentenceTransformer embeddings with context-aware key-term overlap, capturing both semantic fidelity and procedural coherence. Compared to traditional metrics like BERTScore, SBERT, and USE, HSSM demonstrates significantly lower variance (CV: 1.5-2.9%) and stronger correlation with human judgments. Our results show that even minimal prompting (Zero-Shot) can yield highly aligned task flows (HSSM: 96.33%) when evaluated with robust metrics. This work offers a scalable evaluation paradigm for LLM-assisted software planning, with implications for AI-driven project management, prompt engineering, and procedural generation in software education and tooling.
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.