Documentation

Document repositories evolve continuously. Guidelines and policies are revised, superseded, and re-uploaded, so the same content recurs in different wording and newer versions refine or contradict earlier ones. These inconsistencies belong to the growing collection rather than to any single document, yet existing work treats versioning, duplicate detection, and contradiction detection as isolated pairwise tasks and stops once a pair is labeled. We present GVD (Governed Versioning and Deduplication), a framework that unifies cross-document version linking with rule-level conflict resolution under an auditable update policy. Incoming documents are assigned to version families through bidirectional rule alignment, and their rules are compared against the family memory to identify duplicates, contradictions, asymmetric refinements, and new knowledge, with Counterfactual Span Probing (CSP) resolving related pairs that inference misclassifies as neutral. Relation-specific policies suppress duplicates and escalate only consequential changes for review, retaining version lineage as an audit trail. The pipeline runs fully locally, with no large language model. On 120 enterprise documents processed as 140 ingestions across 59 version families, GVD reaches an F1 of 0.97 for version-family construction and 0.94 for rule-level consistency, with CSP raising rule consistency from 0.90 to 0.94.

Large language models (LLMs) have achieved strong performance on a wide range of natural language tasks, and recent benchmarks suggest that they are increasingly adept at multi-hop reasoning. However, these benchmarks are typically short-horizon, requiring only a small number of retrieval or inference steps, and provide limited evidence of reliability on real-world tasks that involve following manuals spanning hundreds of pages with complex, interdependent guidelines. In this paper, we introduce Tasks over Application Manuals (TAM), a benchmark for evaluating long-horizon procedural reasoning. We construct TAM by curating real-world tasks from two domains: ICD-10-CM clinical coding (mapping medical conditions to diagnostic codes) and U.S. federal sentencing (computing crime sentencing guideline outcomes, specifically offense levels), with human-validated labels. Each task requires following an authoritative manual with tens of thousands of rules and executing a sequence of interdependent steps across different sections to produce an exact answer. We evaluate general-purpose prompting approaches, including retrieval-augmented generation, ReAct-style prompting, and an agent-harness baseline on GPT-5, and find that the best exact-match performance remains extremely low: 1% on ICD-10-CM coding and 15.5% on sentencing tasks. These results show that current benchmarks may overestimate LLM reasoning ability and miss a key challenge: reliably following long, rule-based procedures. The complete TAM data and code are publicly available.

This work presents a proof of concept for auditable LLM-assisted medical billing verification based on a decision-basis contract. The contract separates deterministic checks of versioned fee-catalog rules from LLM-based assessment of free-text documentation. The deterministic layer resolves the applicable catalog release and checks code availability, quantity limits, and exclusions. The semantic layer classifies each claimed item as supported, contradicted, or missing required information. Support and contradiction require a verbatim evidence span; unavailable rule context, unsuccessful assessment, or missing required evidence prevents support through fail-closed abstention. We evaluated four locally run open-weight models on a synthetic catalog and 36 curated cases under the contract, an ablation without explicit documentation requirements, and an end-to-end baseline. Outcome agreement varied across models and showed no consistent advantage over the baseline. Explicit documentation requirements improved identification of missing information for all four models. The evidence gate also exposed cases in which correct raw judgments lacked valid evidence and were converted to incomplete decision-basis entries. The results show how explicit decision records can make rule findings, documentation judgments, and abstention reasons inspectable. Evaluation on real catalogs, independently annotated documentation, and with human reviewers is required to assess practical value.

The Asset Administration Shell (AAS) is a cornerstone of Industry 4.0 and the Digital Product Passport, providing standardized digital representations of industrial assets. While manufacturers already maintain extensive technical product documentation, generating AAS instances from existing product datasheets remains a labor-intensive task because technical information is extracted from heterogeneous document structures and often involves company-specific terminology and conventions. In this work, we present AAS-RAIL, a retrieval-augmented information extraction (IE) approach that automatically generates Asset Administration Shells from PDF product datasheets using large language models (LLMs). Instead of relying on a fixed set of few-shot examples, the proposed retrieval-augmented in-context learning (RAIL) approach retrieves LLM-generated extraction helpers from similar Asset Administration Shells to provide instance-specific in-context learning (ICL). This enables the model to adapt its extraction behavior to company-specific naming conventions and formatting styles without fine-tuning. Our core contribution is the dynamic selection of company-specific AAS examples for each datasheet, replacing static prompting with an extraction pipeline that adapts to instances and combines semantic retrieval and structured information extraction. The proposed approach is evaluated on a collection of industrial product datasheets using a selection of open- and closed-weight LLMs. Experimental results show that RAIL consistently improves extraction quality over conventional few-shot prompting, yielding relative improvements of 30.4-52.4%. These results demonstrate that our approach provides an effective improvement for company-specific AAS generation.

Document-to-slide generation is challenging because slides are dense editable artifacts that require both faithful content selection and precise spatial layout. Recent slide agents adopt iterative reflection, but typically follow a monolithic "one version, one feedback" loop: a slide or deck is rewritten, rendered afterward, and critiqued only at the turn boundary. This delayed feedback makes local failures such as overflow, overlap, clipping, and off-canvas placement difficult to attribute and repair. We propose ReDeck, a step-level render-grounded refinement framework that decomposes slide revision into atomic edit actions and returns renderer-derived observations after each step, turning refinement into "one edit, one observation." To balance local repair with global quality, ReDeck uses multi-granular feedback: step-level render feedback for spatial errors, a turn-level adaptive critic for semantic and design guidance, and a submission-level gate for hard layout validation. We further introduce DeckQuiz, a benchmark that decouples content fidelity, spatial correctness, and design quality. Across GPT-5.4, Claude-4.6, and Gemini-3.1, ReDeck consistently outperforms existing slide-generation agents, and ablations confirm that feedback timing and granularity are critical for reliable slide refinement.

Clinical AI often optimizes predictive performance without engaging how clinicians decide where to look and what to write. We present Co-Annotator, which distills expert gaze and dictation into two guidance components: a gaze-aligned Vision Transformer producing fixation-aligned areas of interest (AOIs), and an ontology-bounded vision-language model (VLM) that pre-fills editable biomarker summaries for retinal optical coherence tomography (OCT). We first collect expert gaze and dictations (US1) to train the models, significantly improving diagnostic accuracy and biomarker generation. We then deploy the system with ophthalmology residents: a controlled resident study (US2) confirmed each modality is safe and independently beneficial, with AOI guidance producing lasting perceptual efficiency gains through post-guidance carryover and VLM guidance more than doubling biomarker documentation breadth. In a combined deployment across two academic institutions (US3), providing both modalities simultaneously produced efficiency gains that substantially exceeded either modality alone: correct diagnoses per minute increased by 40% and comment editing time fell by 67%, without compromising diagnostic accuracy. Notably, neither modality improved efficiency during guidance in US2, which makes the in-guidance efficiency gain under combined guidance in US3 the more striking result. Expert-distilled multimodal guidance can remove two distinct clinical workflow bottlenecks at once (visual search overhead and documentation burden) without compromising the diagnostic accuracy clinicians already achieve.

Privacy documents (e.g., privacy policies) are a central mechanism through which digital services disclose data practices and seek user consent. Over the past decades, research on privacy documents has expanded significantly, encompassing not only traditional privacy policies but also short notices (e.g., privacy labels) and interface-level transparency mechanisms. As this research area continues to grow, it has become increasingly difficult to obtain a coherent view of how privacy documents are created, analyzed, evaluated, and maintained across their lifecycle. This SoK provides a unified, lifecycle-oriented view of privacy documents from a software engineering perspective. We systematically review and analyze 290 papers published between 2010 and 2025, organizing them around five research questions that examine how privacy documents are (1) defined and scoped, (2) generated, (3) analyzed and extracted, (4) checked for inconsistencies and noncompliance, and (5) evaluated and improved for usability. Building on our findings, we identify 15 key research trends and 21 open opportunities. We further chart four broader research directions that highlight (i) emerging challenges in AI-centric platforms, (ii) the need for diverse and up-to-date data foundations, (iii) LLM-based unified policy-code analysis, and (iv) dual usability for end-users and developers. We hope this SoK provides a shared foundation for future research on privacy policies and privacy documents.

Large language models (LLMs) increasingly rely on external tools to accomplish complex real-world tasks, making tool documentation a critical grounding resource for LLM agents. Existing studies mainly focus on improving the tool-use capabilities of LLM agents, while largely treating tool documentation as a fixed input. Although several recent works attempt to optimize tool documentation through rewriting or compression, little is known about how the information contained in tool documentation affects agent performance across different settings. To bridge this gap, we conduct a large-scale empirical study on tool documentation for LLM agents. Our study reveals substantial heterogeneity in the information fields provided by existing tool documentation. Moreover, the effectiveness of different information fields is highly dependent on the task domain, LLM backbone, and agent paradigm, indicating that no fixed tool documentation can consistently generalize across diverse agent settings. Motivated by these findings, we propose DocsChisel, an adaptive tool documentation optimization framework for LLM agents. DocsChisel analyzes failed execution traces of a target LLM agent to identify documentation-related issues, and iteratively optimizes tool documentation by adding, removing, and refining information fields for each tool. We evaluate DocsChisel against two state-of-the-art baselines, i.e., EasyTool and DRAFT. Experimental results show that DocsChisel improves the task success rate of LLM agents by 95.89% over the original tool documentation and by 75.15%, on average, over existing baselines, while incurring limited optimization time and token overhead

Evolving documents, such as laws, tax codes, and software documentation, are amended, replaced, and sometimes reverted over time, so a question has different correct answers at different dates. In contrast to encyclopedic knowledge, where an old fact is simply overwritten, an amendment is itself an official text that states what it replaces and when it takes effect, and the earlier version stays correct for its validity period. The central challenge is therefore version resolution, that is, identifying the version in force on the queried date. Existing temporal QA datasets treat time only as an annotation, so version resolution stays untested. We present TIDE, an expert-verified benchmark of 3,050 QA pairs over 644 official customs instruments issued between 1969 and 2025 by the Government of Bangladesh, covering eight task types over deeply code-mixed documents that are heterogeneous in layout and dated in two calendars. In addition, we evaluate nine recent LLMs under a single protocol across parametric, gold-context, and retrieval access, scored by a three-judge LLM council with a hard date gate separating correct meaning from correct time. The best macro-averaged accuracy is only 68.5%. Resolving a version from an implicit date reaches 59.7%, and detecting that the supplied version does not govern the query reaches only 26.7%. Models are more likely to find correct versions than to reject incorrect ones, and they tend to follow a confident parametric answer over the supplied authoritative text. All code and data are available at https://github.com/icsetepa44/TIDE

Scientific and technical writing depends on markup sources that must compile: LaTeX, Typst, and Markdown pipelines fail on missing delimiters, mismatched environments, broken imports, or package conflicts. Existing document-repair evaluations inject faults with ad-hoc edits that lack an empirical fault model. We present TeXFix-Bench, a multi-format benchmark for LLM-based full-source document repair grounded in a mined fault taxonomy. A Grounded-Theory study of localized hard-crash LaTeX faults from TeX Stack Exchange, GitHub commits, and package documentation (168 verified faults, dual open coding at $κ$=0.34) yields an 18-category taxonomy instantiated as DocMut: 48 AST-aware operators across three formats. A three-model cross-benchmark shows DocMut faults are 5.6-9.2 pp harder to repair than pattern-based mutations on the same seeds, and a real-error case study (88 mined human crashes, 67.0% repair success) brackets both synthetic sets from below. We construct 10,437 instances from 743 openly licensed seeds and evaluate seven LLMs under a fixed zero-shot protocol with provider-pinned routing, collecting 48,651 attempts at about USD 200 total inference cost. A complete 6,613-instance x 7-model balanced matrix confirms all rankings. A pinned engine gate yields a 27.5-point intention-to-treat compile spread (56.7-84.2%). Typst is markedly harder than LaTeX and Markdown. A restoration oracle over 28,129 compiling repairs shows that 13.6-18.5% of compiling repairs materially alter document text, and restoration rank diverges from compile rank: the model with the lowest compile rate restores content best among its successes. Compile success alone overstates repair quality. We release the taxonomy, DocMut, and all campaign artifacts.

Just like software and hardware, business processes are susceptible to vulnerabilities that can lead to product quality issues, delays, and increased costs. Business process vulnerabilities can arise from a variety of sources, including conflicting requirements, ambiguous documentation, invalid measurement spec-ifications, omission of quality checks, or implementations that differ from speci-fications. MIRABELLE is a system that identifies and characterizes business logic (BL) vulnerabilities from available business process representations, in-cluding ISO 9000/9001 documentation, user guides, work instructions, and pro-cess execution logs. MIRABELLE leverages recent advances in AI/ML to pro-cess available business process documentation and generate attributed graph rep-resentations of the business logic that can be processed using both graph and for-mal logic approaches for identifying potential vulnerabilities. However, extract-ing the business logic (e.g., operation execution sequences, decisions, input/out-put resources) from mostly natural language artifacts is challenging due to the required domain expertise, inherent process complexity, and the sometimes very large volumes of information. This paper focuses on our experimentation with Large Language Models (LLMs) and their role within MIRABELLE. We report on the performance of several LLMs across vital stages of vulnerability detection, from grammatical and technical error-flagging in short phrasings, to complete process structure recovery and extraction.

Maintaining up-to-date code documentation is difficult in fast-moving repositories because design knowledge is scattered across source files and pull requests. We present CODENS , a system that turns pull requests into living, accessible, and queryable documentation for production codebases. CODENS incrementally builds a typed software knowledge graph from pull requests, enriches components through schema-driven semantic extraction, derives typed relations between them, and exposes the resulting knowledge through three retrieval modes, including agent-guided graph traversal for repository-level question answering. The system also preserves semantic change history across pull requests and integrates both answer-quality and operational evaluation metrics. We evaluate CODENS on a client Ruby on Rails project in production. Results show that CODENS produces highly relevant and well-grounded answers, while qualitative feedback highlights a remaining challenge in concise, documentation-oriented synthesis.

Much empirical legal research depends on translating unstructured text into structured variables. In corporate governance research as elsewhere, this translation has traditionally relied on human coding of documents such as charters and bylaws, a process that is costly, difficult to scale, and often opaque. This paper introduces DECODEM, a set of benchmark datasets for evaluating the automated extraction of corporate governance variables from organizational documents. The benchmarks pair randomly sampled corporate charters and bylaws with high-quality human annotations covering a range of governance provisions commonly studied in empirical work. Using these datasets, the paper evaluates several large-language-model extraction pipelines that vary in prompt design, task decomposition, and document handling. The underlying task consists of a set of document-level binary classification problems, one for each governance variable. The results show that automated extraction is feasible at a high level of accuracy for many provisions, with median performance near the upper bound across approaches. At the same time, performance varies systematically across variables, with a small number of provisions accounting for most of the remaining errors. More elaborate prompting strategies and cascading pipelines do not consistently improve performance for frontier models, but substantially narrow the gap between frontier and efficiency-oriented models in some settings, suggesting that pipeline design can partly substitute for model capability. By providing a standardized benchmark and a systematic evaluation of extraction methods, the paper demonstrates that current frontier models can extract legally meaningful information from complex corporate documents with high accuracy and suggests an important future role for automated feature extraction in constructing corporate governance datasets.

LEED v4.1 BD+C certification remains a document-intensive process that requires reviewers to read hundreds of pages of project evidence and apply credit-specific threshold logic by hand. This paper investigates whether small, locally deployed language models can perform meaningful screening of LEED documentation and how deterministic symbolic components should share that work. A neuro-symbolic pipeline is introduced that aligns project PDFs to LEED credit sections, retrieves evidence with credit-aware keyword signatures, verifies compliance with a locally hosted 4-billion-parameter language model, and applies a LEED-specific numeric checker to quantitative thresholds. Experiments on four university buildings (484 PDFs, 153 credit-level decisions) show that a 4-billion-parameter model (gemma3:4b) is the strongest text-only core verifier, achieving 67.3% accuracy and outperforming a larger 8-billion-parameter model (llama3.1:8b) in this task. The deterministic numeric checker corrects arithmetic errors on key quantitative credits, moving EA-p2 from 50% to 100% accuracy and improving several other credits when required values are reliably extracted. At the same time, the full neuro-symbolic configuration achieves 61.6% overall accuracy, trailing the best text-only baseline due to extraction failures and conservative behavior on qualitative categories. Systematic ablations show that adding low-resolution drawing images (150-300 dpi) consistently reduces accuracy, and that prompt effectiveness depends on the building's ground-truth PASS rate: rubric prompts perform best on documentation-rich projects, while chain-of-thought prompts perform best on documentation-lean projects. Within the specific scope of LEED v4.1 BD+C compliance verification over raw project documentation, this pipeline and its baselines provide an initial reproducible reference point for both accuracy and failure modes.

In critical infrastructure, operational technology environments often cannot be actively scanned, and yet active system feedback is needed for risk assessment and compliance. This paper presents a non-invasive, MCP-grounded multi-agent pipeline that converts natural-language system descriptions into source-verified knowledge graph and audit-ready artifacts in the NIST OSCAL format for continuous automated compliance management. The architecture decouples LLM-based reasoning from deterministic knowledge retrieval against authoritative threat-intelligence sources, reducing the risk of fabricated vulnerabilities and hallucinated attack paths. In an evidence-based synthetic scenario of a water utility, the pipeline achieves 0.90 CVE recall and perfect D3FEND recall. It generates a schema-valid OSCAL System Security Plan and an OSCAL Security Assessment Report. Nevertheless, the core insight is not that grounding via MCP eliminates errors (e.g., hallucinations) entirely from the pipeline, but that it shifts errors into the first phase of asset extraction from the natural language description. Here, a single incorrectly extracted entity can lead to genuine but irrelevant CVEs in subsequent stages of the pipeline, which consumes time and resources. However, it makes the remaining risk visible, verifiable, and suitable for a time-efficient manual review, since the infrastructure (e.g., version numbers, OS, etc.) is typically known.

This paper presents a black-box evaluation framework to systematically assess the ability of Large Language Models (LLMs) to generate Design Structure Matrices (DSMs) from structured technical documentation. Motivated by the closed-source nature of current Auto-DSM pipelines, the framework introduces a reproducible methodology that benchmarks generated DSMs (GEN-DSMs) against manually validated ground-truth matrices (GT-DSMs). The evaluation integrates both single-run and multi-run perspectives, combining structural metrics (Completeness, Correctness, Coupling Density), classification metrics (Selective Accuracy, Abstention Coverage), and stability measures (Entropy, Fleiss' $κ$). To synthesize these aspects, a Composite Quality Score (Q) is proposed. Controlled experiments are conducted on two datasets: a fictive abstract system and a real-world refrigerator decomposition, covering variations in phrasing, parameter-dataset alignment, and system complexity. Results show that LLMs can produce structurally plausible DSMs and achieve high reproducibility under well-structured inputs, but remain sensitive to ambiguity, inconsistent dependency definitions, and prompt formulation. The findings highlight systematic sources of hallucination and abstention failure, demonstrating both the potential and current limitations of LLM-driven DSM automation. The proposed framework provides a transparent benchmark for auditing Auto-DSM pipelines and establishes foundations for integrating LLM-based decomposition methods into model-based systems engineering (MBSE) workflows.

Many information systems are built around documents: self-contained units optimised for print production and linear reading. While effective for large-scale dissemination, the document-centric organisation constrains how knowledge can be structured, updated, shared, and reused. Formal approaches address some of these limitations but struggle to achieve widespread contribution and adoption due to their prioritisation of formal structure over other system properties such as human usability and scope. AI systems are reshaping document production, but without providing a unified portable alternative to traditional documents for humans' expression and exchange of knowledge. This paper presents MMM, a data model for knowledge documentation that emerged from the practical needs of interdisciplinary collaborative research, and positioned here within a comparative analysis of the design space of information systems. MMM combines a small set of normative constraints with the expressive freedom of free-text labels. It is designed for interoperability across disciplines, applications and deployments without requiring semantic convergence. A reference implementation and pilot deployment data demonstrate implementability and early usability.

Generating adversarial driving scenarios is critical for evaluating and improving autonomous vehicle decision-making systems in simulation. Recent approaches rely primarily on the prior knowledge of Large Language Models and Vision-Language Models to generate driving scenarios procedurally. We argue that adversarial scenes should be generated based on the failure diagnosis (e.g., indecisiveness, multi-frame inconsistency) of the driving policy to specifically address the policy's weaknesses instead of relying on prior assumptions. In this paper, we propose SPHINX, a closed-loop framework for adversarial scenario synthesis guided by a simple principle: first explain, then explore. Beyond blindly exploring the scenario space, SPHINX leverages explainable artificial intelligence methods to analyze the policy, identifying key visual concepts and their influence on policy outputs, and the uncertainty of the decisions. Given the interpretable evidence extracted from the policy's own decision process, we use a vision language model to rationalize and criticize failure modes of the current policy. These critics are then used to generate targeted adversarial scenarios for policy retraining and improvement. We demonstrate that SPHINX can highlight an interpretable account of policy failures while other adversarial scene generation cannot. Across the evaluated benchmarks and test suites, SPHINX can be applied to diverse state-of-the-art autonomous vehicle architectures and yields consistent robustness improvements over existing scenario-generation methods.

The reproducibility crisis has directed the AI research community toward improving documentation practices. Several studies have identified methodological issues, and in response, the most impactful venues in the field have introduced reproducibility checklists. We seek to understand whether documentation practices have changed over time by assessing all published papers at five leading AI conferences over the past decade. Seven reproducibility variables were identified, quality-assured and used to analyse 56 800 publications. Our analysis reveals that in the period 2014 to 2024, documentation practices have improved; papers sharing both code and data increased nearly sixfold, from 11% to 64% Building on empirical reproducibility rates from a prior study, we estimate - inferred from documentation practices, not direct testing - that reproducibility increased from 28% in 2014 to 64% in 2024. Improvements in documentation practices predate the introduction of reproducibility checklists, suggesting these changes reflect a broader movement toward open science rather than a direct response to formal requirements.

Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly used for technical document generation, yet single-model outputs often suffer from over-engineering, security blind spots, and incomplete coverage. We propose TriAdReview, a triangular adversarial review architecture that employs two independent reviewer models (engineering and boundary perspectives) and a triangular judging mechanism to iteratively improve a generator model's output. We evaluate TriAdReview across five benchmark tasks - architecture design, code generation, proposal review, security audit, and requirements analysis - using three configurations: single model (baseline), dual model (single review), and triple model (full system). Results across 75 experiments (n=5 per cell) show that the triple model configuration achieves a 10.1% overall improvement over the single model baseline (26.2 vs. 23.8 out of 50; p<0.05, paired t-test), with particularly strong gains on security audit (+27.6%), code generation (+20.8%), and architecture design (+15.6%). A second scorer (mimo-v2.5-pro) confirms the direction with a smaller effect (+2.7%), suggesting moderate inter-rater agreement. However, the system shows a -7.5% degradation on requirements analysis, revealing that adversarial review architectures have a structural bias toward simplification that is counterproductive for completeness-oriented tasks. We analyze this boundary condition through a task-type framework and demonstrate that reviewer prompt adaptation partially mitigates the issue. Our findings provide the first empirical characterization of when multi-model adversarial review helps versus harms, with implications for the design of collaborative AI systems.

Agent-Based Modelling (ABM) relies on clear documentation to ensure credibility and transparency. Although standards exist for documenting models (e.g. ODD), processes (e.g. TRACE, EABSS), and data use (e.g. RAT-RS), their adoption remains limited due to the effort required to produce documentation that is often treated as supplementary. This paper explores the use of Large Language Models (LLMs) to facilitate and partially automate such processes. We conduct a feasibility study focusing on the underused Rigour and Transparency Reporting Standard (RAT-RS), using four LLMs to extract reports from a published ABM paper. We assess consistency and performance across question types, finding that LLMs generate coherent outputs and perform more reliably on descriptive than on explanatory or evaluative tasks. While LLMs can improve reporting quality and consistency, they also exhibit notable limitations. We identify practical heuristics for when LLM-assisted documentation is reliable and when human oversight is needed and call for systematic community-level exploration to enhance rigour and adoption in ABM reporting.

Developers increasingly provide AI coding assistants with persistent context through configuration files such as CLAUDE.md, AGENTS.md, and .cursorrules. These files describe code elements, architecture, and development conventions, forming the context that guides AI tool behavior across sessions. As software evolves, this context can become stale, a phenomenon we call context rot. While AI configuration artifacts are new, the underlying consistency problem connects to decades of software documentation research. Researchers have built tools to check consistency between documentation and code, spanning README files, code comments, API documentation, architecture descriptions, and installation instructions. We argue that this existing toolbox is an immediate starting point for detecting context rot, and we present a research roadmap mapping documentation consistency approaches to corresponding problems in this new setting. As preliminary evidence, applying an existing README/wiki consistency checker to a statistically representative sample of 356 repositories identifies stale code element references in 23.0% of repositories, showing that traditional documentation consistency tools can already surface context rot.

We present GuidaPA, a privacy-preserving chatbot for the Italian Public Administration (PA) trained via Federated Learning (FL) on documentation from two national PA platforms, SIGESON and SIDFORS. Our corpus includes approximately 8 pages of SIGESON manuals and 31 pages of SIDFORS manuals/FAQs; while this study uses public documentation as a safe proxy, the intended deployment extends to restricted internal sources (e.g., tickets, officer manuals, database extracts) that can not be centrally pooled due to regulatory and organizational constraints. GuidaPA integrates role-based access control, secure client-side preprocessing, explicit monitoring of non-IID effects, and parameter-efficient federated fine-tuning of large language models. Using QLoRA (4-bit) over 15 federated rounds with an 80/20 train-test split per client, we evaluate answer quality with ROUGE, BLEU-4, and METEOR. The best federated model achieves ROUGE-1/2/L of 61.10/55.77/59.44, BLEU-4 of 45.02, and METEOR of 63.94-close to private centralized fine-tuning while keeping data on-site. Compared to the general-purpose baseline, domain fine-tuning improves ROUGE-1 from 41.45 to 62.18 and BLEU-4 from 26.97 to 50.90. Overall, the results indicate that FL can deliver high-quality conversational AI for public services without centralized data sharing

Generative retrieval (GR) maps queries directly to document identifiers (docids) using parametric knowledge, However, this design makes corpus expansion costly: adding new documents requires updating model parameters to encode new document-docid associations incurs repeated training and catastrophic forgetting of previously indexed documents. In this work, we revisit incremental GR as an in-context retrieval problem, where newly added documents are supplied as inference-time document-docid evidence. We propose ICICLE, an in-context indexing framework that performs source-aware docid generation over both parametric memory and context-provided document-docid pairs. ICICLE combines a [COPY]-based routing mechanism, preference-based calibration, and large context adaptation to distinguish context-grounded retrieval from parametric retrieval. Experiments on MS MARCO and NQ320K show that ICICLE improves retrieval of newly introduced documents while preserving seen-document retention without corpus-specific retraining. Our analysis further shows that high-shot degradation is mainly caused by routing failure, highlighting source-selection calibration as a key bottleneck for scaling in-context generative retrieval.

Generating high-quality, pedagogically useful questions from lecture slide decks is difficult because important instructional content is distributed across both text and visual elements, and because useful questions must be scaffolded across the flow of a presentation rather than generated slide by slide in isolation. This paper describes Slide Deck Q&A Quality Assurance (slidesqaqa), a Flask-based software system that extracts text and rendered images from PDF slides and processes them through a four-stage large language model pipeline comprising window planning, deck synthesis, slide annotation, and reconciliation. The system reasons jointly about slide modality and pedagogical role, allocates bounded question budgets, and revises draft annotations at the deck level to reduce redundancy and improve coverage. The final output is a structured JSON annotation containing deck-level goals, section structure, slide-level summaries, question sets, and evaluation scores. Initial experiments on two technical lecture decks indicate that the pipeline can filter non-instructional slides and produce high-fidelity, pedagogically coherent questions for visually complex content. The working system is at https://slidesqaqa-974767694043.us-west1.run.app The software repository is at https://github.com/blinding2submit/slidesqaqa

We propose a framework for evaluating structured generative search summaries that are placed atop organic web search results. A structured summary, generated by a large language model, typically consists of an overview, several sections with section titles, and a list of source documents that are cited within the summary. We then describe our plans for implementing and evaluating the framework.

Large language models can answer questions about textbooks, lecture notes, and programming exercises more reliably when their answers are grounded in an explicit knowledge source. Retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) is a common approach: relevant fragments of a document are retrieved and inserted into the model context before answering. For mathematical and technical material, the original LaTeX source can be a better starting point than a PDF, because it contains structural information, labels, sectioning commands, macros, and authorial intent that are often lost or distorted in PDF extraction. However, LaTeX source is not automatically AI-friendly. Cross-references must be resolved, custom macros must be interpreted, exercises and examples must be identified, and author-supplied semantic metadata may be needed. This article describes a focused preprocessing approach for turning LaTeX source, together with its compiled auxiliary files and optional author annotations, into Markdown and JSONL chunks suitable for indexing in a vector database.

Building Information Modeling (BIM) projects increasingly use Information Delivery Specification (IDS) to formalize information requirements in a machine-checkable XML format. Because IDS conditions are grounded in the Industry Foundation Classes (IFC) vocabulary, authoring them requires expertise in IFC concepts, validation tools, and property set conventions. Existing benchmarks for structured generation do not adequately capture the additional burden of vocabulary conformance and external-validator agreement that IDS imposes. We present Ishigaki-IDS-Bench, the first publicly released benchmark for IDS generation from BIM information requirements. The benchmark contains 166 examples spanning 83 practical scenarios authored in Japanese and English by six BIM/IDS experts, each paired with a gold IDS file and metadata covering input format, turn setting, target IFC versions, and construction domain. Evaluation proceeds in two stages: (i) formal validity scored by the buildingSMART IDSAuditTool along Processability, Structure, and Content, and (ii) content fidelity scored by facet-level macro-F1 against the gold IDS. Across 10 LLMs in zero-shot, the highest Facet F1 is 65.6%, achieved by GPT-5.5, while the highest Content pass rate is only 33.1%, achieved by Claude Opus 4.5. Ishigaki-IDS-Bench is released on Hugging Face (DOI 10.57967/hf/8873) under CC BY 4.0, and the evaluation code is released on Zenodo (DOI 10.5281/zenodo.20550510) under Apache-2.0.

Documentation has long guided computer system tuning by distilling expert knowledge into per-parameter recommendations. Yet such guides capture only what experts conclude, discarding how they reason. This fundamental gap manifests in three concrete deficiencies: documentation grows stale as software evolves, fails under heterogeneous workloads, and ignores inter-parameter dependencies. We propose shifting from static documentation to dynamic action for system tuning. We introduce PerfEvolve, which translates expert tuning methodologies into executable skills that equip LLM-based agents to perform version-consistency verification, workload-specific profiling, and multi-parameter joint optimization. Evaluated on PostgreSQL under TPC-C and TPC-H benchmarks, PerfEvolve outperforms state-of-the-art documentation-driven tuning baselines by up to 35.2%. The tool is available at https://github.com/ISCAS-OSLab/PerfEvolve.

Legacy systems concentrate business rules, architectural decisions, and operational exceptions that often remain implicit in code, data, configuration, and maintenance practices. At the same time, language-model-based coding agents depend on reliable context, correctness criteria, and behavioral contracts to modify real systems with lower risk. This paper presents Reversa, a reverse documentation engineering framework for converting legacy software into traceable operational specifications for AI agents. Reversa organizes this process as a multi-agent pipeline: specialized agents map the project surface, analyze modules, extract implicit rules, synthesize architecture, write unit-level specifications, and review generated claims. The proposal emphasizes three mechanisms: traceability between code and specification, explicit confidence marking, and preservation of gaps for human validation. The framework is distributed as a Node.js CLI, installs skills across multiple agent engines, and uses a SHA-256 manifest to preserve modified files during update or uninstall operations. In addition to the architectural description, we report an exploratory case study on migrating an ATM from COBOL to Go, in which the pipeline produced 517 claims classified by an internal confidence index, 10 registered gaps, 53 Gherkin parity scenarios, and a reconstruction plan with 9 of 11 tasks completed at inventory time. Final parity validation and cutover were not completed in this study. We do not claim broad empirical superiority; we position the contribution with respect to the literature on reverse engineering, LLM-based documentation, and software agents, and propose an evaluation protocol with metrics for coverage, traceability, confidence, utility, and cost.

Automated code documentation is essential for modern software development, providing the contextual grounding that both human developers and coding agents rely on to navigate large codebases. Existing repository-level approaches process components independently, causing redundant retrieval and conflicting descriptions across documents while producing outputs that lack hierarchical structure. Therefore, we propose MemDocAgent, a long-horizon agentic framework that generates documentation within a single, integrated context spanning the entire repository. It combines two components: (i) Dependency-Aware Traversal Guiding that predetermines a traversal order respecting dependency and granularity hierarchies; (ii) Memory-Guided Agentic Interaction, in which the agent interacts with RepoMemory, a shared memory accumulating prior work traces through read, write, and verify operations. Through an in-depth multi-criteria evaluation, MemDocAgent achieves the best performance over both open and closed-source baselines and demonstrates practical applicability in real software development workflows.

As global cross-lingual communication intensifies, language barriers in visually rich documents such as PDFs remain a practical bottleneck. Existing document translation pipelines face a tension between linguistic processing and layout preservation: text-oriented Computer-Assisted Translation (CAT) systems often discard structural metadata, while document parsers focus on extraction and do not support faithful re-rendering after translation. We introduce BabelDOC, an Intermediate Representation (IR)-based framework for layout-preserving PDF translation. BabelDOC decouples visual layout metadata from semantic content, enabling document-level translation operations such as terminology extraction, cross-page context handling, glossary-constrained generation, and formula placeholdering. The translated content is then re-anchored to the original layout through an adaptive typesetting engine. Experiments on a curated 200-page benchmark, together with human evaluation and multimodal LLM-as-a-judge evaluation, show that BabelDOC improves layout fidelity, visual aesthetics, and terminology consistency over representative baselines, while maintaining competitive translation precision. The open-source toolkit and its interactive downstream applications are publicly available and have attracted over 8.4K GitHub stars and 17 contributors at the time of writing. A demonstration video is also available.

High-quality source code documentation is vital yet often neglected, especially in critical domains like healthcare where reliability and maintainability are essential. We presented an AI powered framework that automates documentation generation from code and repositories using eight state of the art Large Language Models (LLMs), including GPT, Gemini, Qwen, and LLaMA variants. Built on the PocketFlow orchestration framework, the system applies modular pipelines and advanced prompt engineering to produce structured, context aware documentation. To ensure quality and guide model selection, we introduced a MultiLLMasJudges evaluation framework, where four independent LLMs assess outputs across nine criteria, such as Completeness, Clarity, and Faithfulness. Experiments conducted on an open-source medical physics library, demonstrated showed a 42% performance gap between top and bottom models. By combining diverse model outputs, optimized prompting, and rigorous evaluation, our approach enhances documentation quality and reduces manual effort, especially in safety critical healthcare software.

Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) enhances the factual grounding of Large Language Models by conditioning their outputs on external documents. However, standard embedding-based retrievers treat naturally structured corpora, such as technical manuals, as flat collections of passages, thereby overlooking the hyperlink topology that users rely on when navigating such content. We introduce LARAG (Link-Aware RAG): a lightweight, link-aware retrieval strategy that leverages the author-defined hyperlink structure already present in HTML documentation, encoding hyperlink relations as metadata in the chunk representations and exploiting them to perform a form of graph-like retrieval of locally relevant content. In a benchmark of twenty expert-designed queries over Rulex Platform technical documentation and four prompting strategies, LARAG consistently improves answer quality, achieving the highest BERTScore F1, while retrieving fewer chunks and generating fewer tokens than a baseline RAG architecture used for comparison. These results show that directly leveraging the existing hyperlink topology of technical documentation, even without explicit graph construction or inference, enables an implicit form of graph-like retrieval that yields a more faithful and efficient RAG pipeline, providing better grounding at lower cost.

Software documentation frequently drifts from executable logic as codebases evolve, creating technical debt that degrades maintainability and causes downstream API misuse. While static analysis tools can detect the absence of documentation, they cannot evaluate its semantic consistency. Conversely, standard Large Language Models (LLMs) offer generative flexibility but frequently hallucinate when updating documentation without deep structural awareness of the underlying code. To address this gap, we propose DocSync, an agentic workflow that frames documentation maintenance as a structurally grounded, iterative generation task. DocSync bridges syntactic changes and natural language descriptions by fusing Abstract Syntax Tree (AST) representations and Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) to provide dependency-aware context. Furthermore, to ensure factual consistency, we incorporate a critic-guided refinement loop based on the Reflexion paradigm, allowing the model to self-correct candidate updates against the source code. We empirically evaluate a resource-constrained implementation of DocSync-using a LoRA-adapted small language model - on a proxy code-to-text maintenance task. Our findings demonstrate that this AST-aware agentic approach substantially outperforms standard encoder-decoder baselines across semantic alignment, summary-line faithfulness, and automated judge preferences (e.g., achieving an automated judge score of 3.44/5.0 compared to 1.91 for CodeT5-base). Crucially, the iterative critic loop yields measurable improvements in semantic correctness without requiring scaled-up parameter counts. These results provide strong evidence that coupling structural retrieval with agentic refinement is a highly promising direction for autonomously mitigating documentation debt.

Large Language Models (LLMs) have achieved strong performance on general code generation, but their effectiveness drops sharply in enterprise settings where software development relies on internal private libraries absent from public pre-training corpora. Existing Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) methods provide a training-free solution by retrieving static API documentation, but our analysis shows that documentation mainly helps models identify what APIs to use and remains insufficient for teaching how to use them correctly. Even with oracle API-document retrieval, LLMs still make recurring errors at the API, cross-API, and task levels, including API misuse or hallucination, flawed API composition, and incorrect solution strategies. To address this limitation, we propose MEMCoder, a training-free self-evolving memory framework for private-library code generation. MEMCoder augments existing RAG pipelines with a Multi-level Evolving Memory that continuously accumulates and reuses execution-derived Usage Guidelines at the API, cross-API, and task levels. During generation, MEMCoder retrieves both static API documentation and relevant historical memories to guide code generation; after execution, it analyzes feedback to refine memory through a closed loop of generation, execution, reflection, and update. Extensive experiments on NdonnxEval and NumbaEval show that MEMCoder consistently enhances different RAG backbones across LLMs of different scales, yielding an average absolute pass@1 improvement of 18.41 percentage points. Moreover, MEMCoder outperforms existing self-evolving memory methods and validates the effectiveness of organizing execution feedback into multi-level usage memories.

Software documentation frequently becomes outdated or fails to exist entirely, yet developers need focused views of their codebase to understand complex systems. While automated reverse engineering tools can generate UML diagrams from code, they produce overwhelming detail without considering developer intent. We introduce query-driven UML diagram generation, where LLMs create diagrams that directly answer natural language questions about code. Unlike existing methods, our approach produces semantically focused diagrams containing only relevant elements with contextual descriptions. We fine-tune Qwen2.5-Coder-14B on a curated dataset of code files, developer queries, and corresponding diagram representations in a structured JSON format, evaluating with both automatic detection of structural defects and human assessment of semantic relevance. Results demonstrate that fine-tuning on a modest amount of manually corrected data yields dramatic improvements: our best model achieves the highest F1 scores while reducing defect rates below state-of-the-art LLMs, generating diagrams that are both structurally sound and semantically faithful to developer queries. Thus, we establish the feasibility of using LLMs for scalable contextual, on-demand documentation generation. We make our code and dataset publicly available at https://github.com/i-need-a-pencil/query2diagram.

The rapid proliferation of Generative AI necessitates rigorous documentation standards for transparency and governance. However, manual creation of Model and Data Cards is not scalable, while automated approaches lack large-scale, high-fidelity benchmarks for systematic evaluation. We introduce MetaGAI, a comprehensive benchmark comprising 2,541 verified document triplets constructed through semantic triangulation of academic papers, GitHub repositories, and Hugging Face artifacts. Unlike prior single-source datasets, MetaGAI employs a multi-agent framework with specialized Retriever, Generator, and Editor agents, validated through four-dimensional human-in-the-loop assessment, including human evaluation of editor-refined ground truth. We establish a robust evaluation protocol combining automated metrics with validated LLM-as-a-Judge frameworks. Extensive analysis reveals that sparse Mixture-of-Experts architectures achieve superior cost-quality efficiency, while a fundamental trade-off exists between faithfulness and completeness. MetaGAI provides a foundational testbed for benchmarking, training, and analyzing automated Model and Data Card generation methods at scale. Our data and code are available at: https://github.com/haoxuan-unt2024/MetaGAI-Benchmark.

Generative information retrieval (GenIR) consolidates retrieval into a single neural model that decodes document identifiers (docids) directly from queries. While this model-as-index paradigm offers architectural simplicity, it is poorly suited to dynamic document collections. Unlike modular systems, where indexes are easily updated, GenIR's knowledge is parametrically encoded in its weights; consequently, standard adaptation methods such as full and parameter-efficient fine-tuning can induce catastrophic forgetting. We show that sequential adaptation improves retrieval on newly added documents but substantially degrades performance on earlier slices, exposing a pronounced stability-plasticity trade-off. To address this, we propose post-adaptation memory tuning (PAMT), a memory-only stabilization stage that augments an adapted model with a modular parametric memory head (PMH). PAMT freezes the backbone and attaches a product-key memory with fixed addressing. During prefix-trie constrained decoding, decoder hidden states sparsely query PMH to produce residual corrections in hidden space; these corrections are mapped to score adjustments via the frozen output embedding matrix, computed only over trie-valid tokens. This guides docid generation while keeping routing and backbone parameters fixed. To limit cross-slice interference, PAMT updates only a fixed budget of memory values selected using decoding-time access statistics, prioritizing entries frequently activated by the current slice and rarely used in prior sessions. Experiments on MS MARCO and Natural Questions under sequential, disjoint corpus increments show that PAMT substantially improves retention on earlier slices with minimal impact on retrieval performance for newly added documents, while modifying only a sparse subset of memory values per session.