This work develops FLARE (Formulation-Level Automated Reformulation Evaluation), a method that uses an LLM-based agent and the Lean proof assistant to verify proposed reformulations against a reference formulation to enable reliable verification in automated optimization modeling.
Abstract
Mixed-Integer Linear Programming (MILP) is a fundamental tool for combinatorial optimization with extensive real-world applications. A central challenge is designing computationally efficient MILP formulations. Large Language Models (LLMs) offer new opportunities to automate the modeling process, from deriving formulations to strengthening them. Reliable automation requires robust methods for verifying that proposed formulations preserve the underlying optimization problem. However, existing approaches evaluate formulations numerically and fail to reason about general problem instances. We resolve this limitation by introducing a constructive definition of MILP reformulation that can be formalized in Lean and machine-checked. We develop FLARE (Formulation-Level Automated Reformulation Evaluation), a method that uses an LLM-based agent and the Lean proof assistant to verify proposed reformulations against a reference formulation. To evaluate our approach, we introduce FormulationBench, a challenging dataset of 20 problems and 109 formulations. FLARE outperforms existing methods, with 100% accuracy on the NP-hard subset of FormulationBench. Furthermore, FLARE produces a machine-checkable certificate for every reformulation it accepts. For cases where formal guarantees are not necessary, we introduce FLARE-NL, a fast and cheap LLM proxy that matches FLARE's accuracy but produces no certificate. These methods enable reliable verification in automated optimization modeling.
SOVER, an LLM-assisted SMT framework that separates semantic mapping from formal certification, is introduced, and Z3 checks domain cross-feasibility and global objective-order preservation for mixed-integer linear formulations, while dReal provides tolerance-aware feasibility/range and $\epsilon$-argmin checks for con...
This work presents a pipeline that combines LLM-based constraint generation with empirical evaluation and formal verification, and handles MiniZinc’s partial semantics by requiring the base model to be safe and separately proving that the proposed constraint is well-defined for all instances and solutions of the base m...
Philipp Danzinger, Nysret Musliu· International Conference on...· 0 citations
This work introduces a framework that addresses both verification levels in the Lean theorem prover, and can be used to prove formulation-level properties, such as equivalence, equisatisfiability, and the correctness of symmetry-breaking constraints, parametrically for entire problem families.
Pablo Manrique, Stefan Szeider· arXiv.org· 0 citations
Combinatorial problems appear in numerous industrial applications. A common approach is to formulate these problems as declarative constraint models that can subsequently be compiled to and solved by a range of back-end solvers. Recent work shows that Large Language Models (LLMs) can produce correct models from natural...
A solver-informed diagnosis mechanism that exploits fine-grained solver statistics as verbal gradients for targeted refinement and a structured memory abstracts prior experience into reusable modeling strategies, avoiding redundant exploration while enabling zero-shot transfer to unseen problems and bootstrapping small...
Haofeng Yuan, Jianing Peng, Jieyi Bi et al.· 0 citations
Machine learning methods have shown that data-driven policies can accelerate mixed-integer linear programming (MILP) solvers, but many such approaches remain difficult to inspect, adapt, and deploy because the learned policy is represented as an external predictor or other opaque model. By contrast, explicit solver log...
Jinbiao Nie, Kewei Feng, Xiaoyuan Zhang et al.· arXiv.org· 0 citations
We use cookies to run the site and, with your consent, for analytics and to show ads.
See our Cookie Policy.