TriVAL: A Tri-Validation Framework for Faithful Automatic Optimization Modeling
Authors: Ziyang Fang, JinXi Wang, Jinghui Zhong, Yew-Soon Ong
Abstract
Optimization modeling serves as the pivotal bridge between natural-language problem descriptions and optimization solvers, and remains a cornerstone for bringing operations research (OR) into real-world decision making. Recent advances in large language models (LLMs) have driven significant progress in automatic optimization modeling. However, existing methods still lack explicit validation during the modeling process, allowing errors introduced in earlier stages to carry through the pipeline and ultimately reduce final modeling accuracy. To address this challenge, we introduce TriVAL, a tri-validation framework that performs explicit validation at three stages of automatic optimization modeling: semantic specification, mathematical formulation, and code generation. At each stage, TriVAL follows a construct-validate-revise loop that assesses the current result against stage-specific criteria and revises it when needed. This design helps identify and correct errors before they accumulate across stages, helping preserve faithfulness throughout the modeling process. To evaluate automatic optimization modeling on more challenging combinatorial problems, we further introduce NL4COP, a benchmark of 150 instances across 50 diverse problem types with more complex decision logic, more tightly coupled constraints, and more demanding modeling requirements than existing benchmarks. Experiments on NL4COP and established benchmarks show that TriVAL consistently outperforms state-ofthe-art methods, with the largest gains on the most challenging problems.
Building mathematical optimization models is critical in operations research (OR), while it requires substantial human expertise. Recent advancements have utilized large language models (LLMs) to automate this modeling process. However, existing works often struggle to verify the correctness of the generated optimization models, without checking the rationality of the constraints and variables or the validity of solutions to the generated models. This hampers the subsequent verification and correction steps, and thus it severely hurts the modeling accuracy. To address this challenge, we propose a novel LLM-based framework with Dual-side Verification (Opt-Verifier) from both structure and solution perspectives, thereby improving the modeling accuracy. The structure-side verification ensures that the modeling structure of the generated optimization models aligns with the original problem description, accurately capturing the problem's constraints and requirements. Meanwhile, the solution-side verification interprets and evaluates the solutions' validity, confirming that the optimization models are logically and mathematically sound. Experiments on popular benchmarks demonstrate that our approach achieves over 20% improvement in accuracy.
We propose OptiAgent, a multi-agent framework that, given a natural language description of an Operations Research problem, is able to output a solver-ready mathematical formulation as well as executable code. Our architecture prioritizes the mathematical modeling step, where dedicated agents extract structures, such as decision variables and constraints, enabling iterative self-correction. We introduce a novel multi-loop validation architecture with four specialized feedback mechanisms, each targeting a distinct failure mode such as misinterpretation, structural defects, mathematical inconsistencies, validation failures, and code errors. Alongside accuracy, our modular design improves the process of solving optimization problems by improving transparency, as each agent exposes its reasoning and feedback, making the full modeling process auditable. Our framework achieves state-of-the-art performance on 3 out of 4 benchmarks across LP, MILP, and Nonlinear Programming tasks, while remaining highly competitive on the remaining dataset.
Adriana Laurindo Monteiro, Nayse Fagundes, Gabriel Mattos Langeloh +4
Solving combinatorial optimization problems (COPs) requires not only efficient algorithms but also carefully crafted formulations. While recent works have leveraged LLMs to automate optimization modeling, current frameworks predominantly rely on a rigid mixed-integer linear programming (MILP) paradigm. In this paper, we argue that not all problems are best modeled as MILP, as forcing complex domains into linear constraints can induce prohibitive modeling complexity and severely restrict solver flexibility. To address this, we propose OptiDSL, a framework that shifts the focus from rigid MILP formulations to domain-specific language (DSL) representations. By utilizing LLMs to map natural language onto standardized, domain-accepted structures, OptiDSL decouples problem formulation from execution. This paradigm enables seamless integration with a diverse library of specialized solvers, ranging from traditional heuristics to modern learning-based methods. Experimental results on the comprehensive benchmark of 44 COP types show that OptiDSL significantly surpasses MILP-based pipelines, yielding a 51.66% gain in formulation accuracy and a 91.71% decrease in modeling time. Notably, it also outperforms MILP-based pipelines on the existing benchmark, achieving a 23.09% higher formulation accuracy. Our code is available at https://anonymous.4open.science/r/OptiDSL.