Emanuel Dantas Filho | Searcharxiv

arXiv2026

Structural Validation of LLM-Generated Microservice Decompositions Using Source-Code Dependencies

Decomposing monolithic systems into microservices is a key activity in software modernization. Although Large Language Models (LLMs) can generate semantically plausible decompositions from textual requirements, it remains unclear whether these proposals preserve the structural dependencies implemented in the source code. This paper evaluates the structural adherence of microservice decompositions generated by OpenAI o3 for the PetClinic and Bookstore systems. We propose an automated validation pipeline based on static dependency analysis and compare zero-shot and few-shot prompting using dependency preservation (TPD) and dependency violation (TVD) metrics. A robustness analysis was conducted to control for differences in class-to-service mapping coverage. After normalization, both prompting strategies produced equivalent structural adherence, achieving TPD values of 68.0% (PetClinic) and 83.3% (Bookstore). The findings demonstrate that structural evaluations of LLM-generated decompositions should explicitly control for mapping coverage, as apparent differences between prompting strategies may otherwise reflect methodological bias rather than genuine architectural quality.

cs.SE↗

arXiv2026

Comparing Large Language Models on Scrum Certification-Style Questions: Accuracy, Stability, and Error Patterns

Large Language Models (LLMs) are increasingly used in exam- and certification-style question answering tasks, where their ability to retrieve, interpret, and apply domain-specific knowledge can be systematically assessed. In Software Engineering, such settings are particularly relevant when questions depend on strict adherence to normative definitions, roles, artifacts, and rules. This paper evaluates the performance of three contemporary LLMs, \textit{GPT-5 mini}, \textit{Gemini 3 Flash}, and \textit{DeepSeek Chat 3.2}, in answering 993 Scrum certification-style questions aligned with the Professional Scrum Master I (PSM I) assessment format. We evaluated the models under three prompting strategies (\textit{zero-shot}, \textit{chain-of-thought}, and \textit{source-grounded}), with repeated executions to assess intra-model stability. We also analyzed performance across Scrum topics and question formats, complemented by a qualitative analysis of recurring error patterns in incorrect answers. Results revealed clear differences among models, with Gemini 3 Flash achieving the highest accuracy, followed by GPT-5 mini and DeepSeek Chat 3.2, while intra-model variability remained low across all conditions. By question format, the models achieved the highest accuracy on single-answer multiple-choice items, whereas multi-select and True/False questions were more error-prone. By topic, performance was more consistent in normatively explicit areas such as Artifacts, Empiricism, and Product Value, but more fragile in Scrum Values, Self-Managing Teams, and Stakeholders \& Customers. The qualitative analysis showed that errors were systematic rather than random, involving overgeneralization, restrictive wording, compound distractors, and conflicts between common market interpretations and strict Scrum definitions.

cs.SE↗