Ge Li

Zheng Fang, Dongming Jin, Yihong dong et al.

Large Language Models have emerged as programming assistants. However, the efficacy of code generation is constrained by the quality of input requirements, which are frequently ambiguous, incomplete, or underspecified. While LLMs excel at one-shot code synthesis, their ability to proactively clarify intent remains underexplored, as a critical trait for robust software engineering. Existing benchmarks largely overlook this interactive bottleneck, assuming perfectly specified prompts that do not reflect the iterative nature of requirement elicitation. To bridge this gap, we introduce ClarifyCodeBench, a novel interactive benchmark for evaluating LLMs' capability in resolving requirement ambiguity. Constructed from real-world programming tasks, ClarifyCodeBench features high-quality manual annotations, including N unique ambiguity types, associated clarification questions, and corresponding ground-truth answers. Furthermore, we formalize two rigorous metrics to assess the interaction quality: Turn-discounted Key Question Rate, which penalizes inefficient questioning, and Optimal Round Adherence, which measures the precision of the elicitation process. We conduct a systematic evaluation of six state-of-the-art LLMs using ClarifyCodeBench. Our empirical results yield three critical insights: 1) Capability Decoupling: Strong code generation performance does not inherently translate to effective requirement clarification; 2) The Reasoning Paradox: While increased computational thinking enhances code correctness, it yields marginal gains in identifying ambiguities; 3) The Multi-ambiguity Ceiling: LLMs' clarification performance degrades sharply as the density of ambiguities increases, revealing a significant bottleneck in handling complex, real-world specifications. Our work underscores the necessity for future AI4SE research to transition from static synthesis to interactive elicitation.

Wenhao Zhang, Kuanwei Lin, Xuyi Yang et al.

Long-video reasoning is fundamentally constrained by how models acquire and utilize visual evidence. Existing tool-augmented video frameworks often interleave temporal grounding and answer reasoning within a single trajectory, causing early semantic hypotheses to bias evidence localization. We term this failure mode premature semantic commitment, where biased grounding retrieves incomplete evidence and incomplete evidence further reinforces incorrect reasoning. To address this issue, we propose EFlow, an evidence-first video reasoning framework built upon Qwen3-VL. EFlow explicitly separates temporal grounding and logical reasoning through CoT for Temporal Grounding and CoT for Reasoning, enabling the model to retrieve relevant evidence before answer inference. In addition, EFlow introduces a confidence-aware reflection mechanism that re-evaluates the full video when retrieved evidence is potentially insufficient. We further construct dedicated trajectory datasets and train EFlow through supervised fine-tuning, reinforcement learning, and reinforcement fine-tuning. Extensive experiments across five video understanding benchmarks demonstrate that EFlow consistently improves long-video reasoning performance.