arXiv:2604.15222cs.SEcs.AI2026-04

AI可快速评估需求质量,但专家判断仍不可或缺。

AI-Assisted Requirements Engineering: An Empirical Evaluation Relative to Expert Judgment

论文配图:AI-Assisted Requirements Engineering: An Empirical Evaluation Relative to Expert Judgment
图 1 · 摘自论文原文
  • 用AI工具与专家对比评估需求的完整性、清晰度等
  • AI在语法结构上准确率高,但上下文理解弱
  • 适合需快速初筛的需求评审场景

人工智能正越来越多地应用于系统工程中的需求工程环节,而该领域仍高度依赖专家判断进行质量评估与验证。尽管近期的AI工具在分析和生成需求方面展现出潜力,其在正式系统工程流程中的作用及与INCOSE标准的一致性仍不明确。本文采用结构化系统工程方法,比较了经验丰富的系统工程师与基于AI的评估工具对系统需求的评价。评估依据INCOSE“良好需求”标准,聚焦一致性、完整性、清晰度和可测试性,不仅关注结果准确性,还考察评估决策逻辑。结果显示,AI工具能提供一致且快速的初步评估,尤其在句法与结构质量方面表现良好;然而,在上下文解读、歧义处理和权衡推理方面,专家判断依然关键。研究支持将AI定位为需求工程生命周期中的辅助决策工具,而非替代人类工程师。从系统工程角度看,本研究提供了实证证据,表明在保持可追溯性、责任性和工程一致性的同时,可有效整合AI于需求工程工作流中。

原文摘要 · Abstract (English)

Artificial Intelligence is increasingly introduced into systems engineering activities, particularly within requirements engineering, where quality assessment and validation remain heavily dependent on expert judgment. While recent AI tools demonstrate promising capabilities in analyzing and generating requirements, their role within formal systems engineering processes-and their alignment with established INCOSE criteria-remains insufficiently understood. This paper investigates the extent to which AI-based tools can support systems engineers in evaluating requirement quality, without replacing professional expertise. The research adopts a structured systems engineering methodology to compare AI-assisted requirement evaluation with human expert assessment. A controlled study was conducted in which system requirements were evaluated against established INCOSE ``good requirement'' criteria by both experienced systems engineers and an AI-based assessment tool. The evaluation focused on consistency, completeness, clarity, and testability, examining not only accuracy but also the decision logic underlying each assessment. Results indicate that AI tools can provide consistent and rapid preliminary assessments, particularly for syntactic and structural quality attributes. However, expert judgment remains essential for contextual interpretation, ambiguity resolution, and trade-off reasoning. Rather than positioning AI as a replacement for systems engineers, the findings support its role as a decision-support mechanism within the RE lifecycle. From a systems engineering perspective, this study contributes empirical evidence on how AI can be integrated into RE workflows while preserving traceability, accountability, and engineering consistency.

需求工程AI辅助专家判断

Thank you to arXiv for use of its open access interoperability. PaperDance 不是 arXiv 官方产品;中文卡片由大模型生成,请以原文为准。