arXiv preprint ·
Right Answers, Costly Models: The Efficiency Gap in LLM-based Optimization Modeling
- Published
- Source
- arXiv preprint, posted before peer review
- Original
- Read it at arXiv
- Topics
Abstract
Optimization modeling formulates real-world decision problems as mathematical programs that solvers can use to find optimal decisions. Large language models (LLMs) can automate this process, but the resulting correct formulations can require substantial time and memory to construct and solve, limiting practical scalability. Therefore, we systematically investigate whether LLMs can identify problem structure from natural-language descriptions and apply suitable optimization modeling techniques to generate mathematical models and solver code that solve the problems correctly and efficiently. To this end, we first curate OptTips, a knowledge base of 50 expert modeling techniques in eight families. Using this knowledge, we develop OptDachshund, a multi-agent framework that transforms problems from existing optimization benchmarks into new tasks for evaluating LLMs' use of modeling techniques. It constructs conventional and expert mathematical models with solver code for the same task and data, providing baselines for correctness and computational cost. The resulting EfficientOpt benchmark contains 561 expert-reviewed tasks with paired reference implementations. Evaluation of 11 representative LLMs reveals an efficiency gap on correctly solved tasks with comparable measurements: for every LLM, most generated programs take longer to solve than their expert counterparts. Within the comparable reference-size subset, 57\% of programs with correct objective values and fewer variables and linear constraints have longer recorded solver times. Case studies show that different modeling techniques can achieve the same optimal value at similar recorded cost. Faster solving may not reduce execution time if the code takes longer to prepare data and build the model. LLM optimization modeling should therefore be evaluated for both correctness and computational efficiency.
The authors’ abstract, as arXiv lists it. arXiv’s listings, abstracts included, are free for anyone to reuse.
Read it on ReadSearch
Each opens after you create an account, and brings you back to this paper.
More in Machine Learning
ReGain: Restoring Subject Fidelity in Personalization on Synthetic Images
Geometric Similarity in VLM Low-Level Vision Representations
Unveiling the Value of Motion for Cinematic Camera Trajectories
Learning Multiple Timescales for Goal-Conditioned Reinforcement Learning
Concept-Grounded Attention: A Controlled Evaluation of Graph-Injected Attention, Temporal Versioning, and Epistemic Status
Get the few papers worth your time in Machine Learning every morning.
ReadSearch reads the new papers in your field each day and brings you the few worth reading, each with its key finding in a sentence.