Alin-Gabriel Văduva | Searcharxiv

arXiv2026

Code2UML: Agentic LLMs with context engineering for scalable software visualization

Large Language Model (LLM)-based code analysis tools are adopted to automate software documentation tasks. However, the scalability of these approaches to real codebases, where Intermediate Representations (IR) exceed LLM context limits, remains underexplored. This paper introduces an agentic architecture with context engineering for automated UML diagram generation from source code repositories. It employs a hierarchy of five specialized agents: PlannerAgent, AnalyzerAgent, DiagramAgent, CorrectorAgent and DependencyAnalyzerAgent, built on the Claude Agent SDK, each addressing a distinct cognitive subtask. A deterministic, importance-weighted IR compaction layer transforms full project IRs into diagram-specific views guaranteed to fit within token constraints, requiring no LLM calls and completing in milliseconds. Thus, we evaluate the system across 12 open-source repositories in 4 programming languages (Java, JavaScript, PHP, Python) and 7 UML diagram types, producing 84 observations assessed on 5 automated metrics. Results demonstrate high syntactic validity (mean: 91.5%, with component and deployment diagrams reaching 100%), strong relationship precision (mean: 0.858) and consistent structural quality (mean: 81.7/100, with cross-language variance of 3.1 points). Entity recall averaged 0.313, reflecting deliberate architectural prioritization over exhaustive coverage. A sensitivity analysis (31 to 4,578 IR entities) confirms that quality scores remain stable regardless of scale.

cs.SE↗

arXiv2026

Are we still able to recognize pearls? Machine-driven peer review and the risk to creativity: An explainable RAG-XAI detection framework with markers extraction

The integration of large language models (LLMs) into peer review raises a concern beyond authorship and detection: the potential cascading automation of the entire editorial process. As reviews become partially or fully machine-generated, it becomes plausible that editorial decisions may also be delegated to algorithmic systems, leading to a fully automated evaluation pipeline. They risk reshaping the criteria by which scientific work is assessed. This paper argues that machine-driven assessment may systematically favor standardized, pattern-conforming research while penalizing unconventional and paradigm-shifting ideas that require contextual human judgment. We consider that this shift could lead to epistemic homogenization, where researchers are implicitly incentivized to optimize their work for algorithmic approval rather than genuine discovery. To address this risk, we introduce an explainable framework (RAG-XAI) for assessing review quality and detecting automated patterns using markers LLM extractor, aiming to preserve transparency, accountability and creativity in science. The proposed framework achieves near-perfect detection performance, with XGBoost, Random Forest and LightGBM reaching 99.61% accuracy, AUC-ROC above 0.999 and F1-scores of 0.9925 on the test set, while maintaining extremely low false positive rates (<0.23%) and false negative rates (~0.8%). In contrast, the logistic regression baseline performs substantially worse (89.97% accuracy, F1-score 0.8314). Feature importance and SHAP analyses identify absence of personal signals and repetition patterns as the dominant predictors. Additionally, the RAG component achieves 90.5% top-1 retrieval accuracy, with strong same-class clustering in the embedding space, further supporting the reliability of the framework's outputs.

cs.AI↗