Saved in:
| Main Authors: | , , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Preprint |
| Published: |
2024
|
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://arxiv.org/abs/2411.07360 |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| _version_ | 1866915015186972672 |
|---|---|
| author | Tamanna, Salma Begum Uddin, Gias Wang, Song Xia, Lan Zhang, Longyu |
| author_facet | Tamanna, Salma Begum Uddin, Gias Wang, Song Xia, Lan Zhang, Longyu |
| contents | Hallucinations, the tendency to produce irrelevant/incorrect responses, are prevalent concerns in generative AI-based tools like ChatGPT. Although hallucinations in ChatGPT are studied for textual responses, it is unknown how ChatGPT hallucinates for technical texts that contain both textual and technical terms. We surveyed 47 software engineers and produced a benchmark of 412 Q&A pairs from the bug reports of two OSS projects. We find that a RAG-based ChatGPT (i.e., ChatGPT tuned with the benchmark issue reports) is 36.4% correct when producing answers to the questions, due to two reasons 1) limitations to understand complex technical contents in code snippets like stack traces, and 2) limitations to integrate contexts denoted in the technical terms and texts. We present CHIME (ChatGPT Inaccuracy Mitigation Engine) whose underlying principle is that if we can preprocess the technical reports better and guide the query validation process in ChatGPT, we can address the observed limitations. CHIME uses context-free grammar (CFG) to parse stack traces in technical reports. CHIME then verifies and fixes ChatGPT responses by applying metamorphic testing and query transformation. In our benchmark, CHIME shows 30.3% more correction over ChatGPT responses. In a user study, we find that the improved responses with CHIME are considered more useful than those generated from ChatGPT without CHIME. |
| format | Preprint |
| id |
arxiv_https___arxiv_org_abs_2411_07360 |
| institution | arXiv |
| publishDate | 2024 |
| record_format | arxiv |
| spellingShingle | ChatGPT Inaccuracy Mitigation during Technical Report Understanding: Are We There Yet? Tamanna, Salma Begum Uddin, Gias Wang, Song Xia, Lan Zhang, Longyu Software Engineering Hallucinations, the tendency to produce irrelevant/incorrect responses, are prevalent concerns in generative AI-based tools like ChatGPT. Although hallucinations in ChatGPT are studied for textual responses, it is unknown how ChatGPT hallucinates for technical texts that contain both textual and technical terms. We surveyed 47 software engineers and produced a benchmark of 412 Q&A pairs from the bug reports of two OSS projects. We find that a RAG-based ChatGPT (i.e., ChatGPT tuned with the benchmark issue reports) is 36.4% correct when producing answers to the questions, due to two reasons 1) limitations to understand complex technical contents in code snippets like stack traces, and 2) limitations to integrate contexts denoted in the technical terms and texts. We present CHIME (ChatGPT Inaccuracy Mitigation Engine) whose underlying principle is that if we can preprocess the technical reports better and guide the query validation process in ChatGPT, we can address the observed limitations. CHIME uses context-free grammar (CFG) to parse stack traces in technical reports. CHIME then verifies and fixes ChatGPT responses by applying metamorphic testing and query transformation. In our benchmark, CHIME shows 30.3% more correction over ChatGPT responses. In a user study, we find that the improved responses with CHIME are considered more useful than those generated from ChatGPT without CHIME. |
| title | ChatGPT Inaccuracy Mitigation during Technical Report Understanding: Are We There Yet? |
| topic | Software Engineering |
| url | https://arxiv.org/abs/2411.07360 |