arXiv AI
Oct 1

Right Answers, Costly Models: The Efficiency Gap in LLM-based Optimization Modeling

The paper introduces OptTips, a knowledge base of 50 expert optimization modeling techniques, and OptDachshund, a multi‑agent framework that generates mathematical models and solver code from natural‑language problem descriptions. Using these tools, the authors create the EfficientOpt benchmark, comprising 561 expert‑reviewed tasks with paired reference implementations, to evaluate large language models (LLMs) on both correctness and computational efficiency. Their experiments with 11 LLMs show a consistent efficiency gap: even when LLMs produce correct solutions, the resulting programs often take longer to solve than expert‑crafted counterparts, highlighting the need to assess both accuracy and runtime performance in LLM‑based optimization modeling.

By Zhong Li, Xin Huang, Jinhui Wan, Xiangyi Wang, Shenkai Zhang, Ruiqi Chen, Wenyu Liu, Zaiwen Wen, Ziyan Luo
arXiv AI
Jul 29

Large Language Model for Operations Research Formulation Selection in Multi-Warehouse Inventory Allocation

arXiv:2607. 25956v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Multi-warehouse inventory allocation is typically formulated as a mixed-integer programming (MIP) problem, yet no single formulation consistently matches heterogeneous instance-level regimes induced by demand concentration, inventory imbalance, replenishment scale, service constraints, and forecast volatility.

By Jintao Xu, Yingzheng Ma, Jiong Dong, Yongzhi Qi, Jianshen Zhang
arXiv AI
Sep 7

Ask Before You Optimize: Dynamic Pre-Formulation Clarification for Interactive Optimization

The paper introduces OR‑Clarify, a benchmark that tests whether large language models can identify missing elements in natural‑language optimization requests before formulating a mathematical model. Each task provides a partial problem description and hides structured slots; agents interact with a simulated user to recover these slots, with metrics for accuracy, stopping decisions, and interaction cost. The authors also propose InterOPT, a two‑stage framework that detects unresolved gaps and decides whether to ask further questions or stop, achieving superior slot recovery in choice‑based experiments and competitive performance in open‑ended settings.

By Sihan Ge, Yichen Lin, Chenyu Zhou, Jianghao Lin, Tao Yao, Dongdong Ge