SAILOR, a proof-of-concept system that detects such unsupported numerical choices, asks the user targeted follow-up questions, and updates the optimization model before returning a solution, is presented.
Abstract
Natural-language descriptions of optimization problems may be incomplete or vague about numerical information that a solver requires, including costs, capacities, demands, bounds, and penalties. A language model can translate the description into code, but when a required value is absent it must either stop or guess. We present SAILOR, a proof-of-concept system that detects such unsupported numerical choices, asks the user targeted follow-up questions, and updates the optimization model before returning a solution. Questions are prioritized using uncertainty and solver-derived estimates of how strongly each missing value affects the current model. We evaluate the pipeline on 1,723 instances from seven masked benchmarks using an idealized simulator that returns ground-truth values. Exact objective-value agreement ranges from 27.0% to 87.6% across datasets, with 1.4--5.7 questions per instance on average. These results establish feasibility under controlled branch-and-reveal feedback; they do not measure performance with human users or general structural model repair. Code is available at: https://github.com/sshaghayeghs/SAILOR.
This work introduces InteractBench, a benchmark comprising 322 high-quality interactive problems curated from Codeforces, AtCoder, IOI, and ICPC, and assesses whether model-generated code can acquire information and track state dynamically.
LLM-based code generation fails when correctness depends on execution-dependent coupling: the meaning of one routine is defined by the runtime behavior of another, a relationship that cannot be resolved from textual descriptions alone. This limitation, which we call static binding, is not confined to explicitly coupled...
Gnaneswar Villuri, Hashmath Shaik, Alex Doboli· 1 citation
This work introduces OR-Clarify, a benchmark for pre-formulation clarification and proposes Interactive Optimization (InterOPT), a two-stage framework that identifies unresolved formulation-critical gaps and uses them to guide whether to ask the next question or to stop.
Si-Han Ge, Yi-Chen Lin, Chen-Yu Zhou et al.· 0 citations
This study empirically evaluates whether cost-efficient Large Language Models (LLMs) can be trusted to generate enterprise code to a written specification. Three models (Gemini Flash 3, GPT-5.4 mini and Claude Haiku 4.5) were asked to solve 992 algorithmic problems as Java Spring Boot service methods conforming to a ma...
Chandimal Adikari, N. Herath· International Conference on...· 0 citations
This work systematically investigates 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.
Zhong Li, Xin Huang, Jin-Hui Wan et al.· 0 citations
SemVerBench is introduced, the first benchmark of LLM version-constraint resolution semantics across three ecosystems (npm, PEP 440, Cargo), and six frontier models are evaluated: Opus significantly outperforms all other models, and Sonnet outperforms the OpenAI models (McNemar).