CORTEXA
← Browse
arxivcs.AI2026-07-31

ModelEquivBench: Certifying Multi-Relational Evaluation of LLM-Generated Optimization Models

Penglin Zhu, Jungang Xu

Large language models increasingly generate optimization models from natural language, but existing evaluation often reduces a generated model and its ground truth to a single equivalent/not-equivalent verdict or an execution-success rate--labels that are neither independently checkable nor faithful to the multiple distinct senses in which two formulations can agree. We present ModelEquivBench, a certifying, multi-relational evaluation system that reports a per-pair semantic profile E0--E6: model construction and exact ingestion (E0), verified representation alignment (E1), same-space and projected feasible-set relations (E2, E3), objective-order equivalence (E4), optimal-value equality (E5), and optimizer-set equivalence (E6). Each decided entry carries relation-appropriate, independently re-checkable evidence: replayable traces or explicit maps for E0--E1, exact-rational certificates for positive E2--E6 conclusions, and explicit witnesses for supported negatives. Incomplete mapping search, unsupported structure, and resource limits produce typed UNKNOWN or N/A outcomes rather than guesses, while unmet prerequisites are reported as ABSENT. Using ModelEquivBench to evaluate three model snapshots--GPT-5.4, Claude Sonnet 4.6, and Qwen3.5-397B-A17B--on the same frozen cohort of 173 base problems (346 cells per model) under a no-repair protocol, the resulting profiles expose distinctions that coarse baselines do not represent: 49, 35, and 25 cells contain executable candidates that are nevertheless certified negative on at least one supported relation, and 25, 8, and 18 structural rejections occur on pairs for which E2 certifies mapped feasible-set equality under a verified map. The three model snapshots fail at different stages of the profile and therefore cannot be meaningfully reduced to a single accuracy score.

View free PDFSource page

Related papers

arxivcs.CLcs.AI2026-07-10

Faithful by Design: Evaluating and Improving LLM-Generated Clinical Trial Summaries for Multi-Stakeholder Audiences

Robert Williams

Large language models are increasingly used to summarize clinical trial results for healthcare providers, patients, and payers, but their tendency to hallucinate poses significant risks in this high-stakes context. This study introduces a benchmark evaluation framework for measur…

View free PDFSource page
arxivcs.CLcs.AIcs.LG2026-07-07

Improving LLM-Generated Process Model Quality Through Reinforcement Learning: The Role of Reward Function Design

Alexander Rombach, Chantale Lauer, Nijat Mehdiyev

Large language models (LLMs) can generate BPMN process models from natural-language descriptions, yet supervised fine-tuning (SFT) limits their output quality to the patterns present in the training data. Reinforcement learning (RL) can optimize beyond this ceiling using external…

View free PDFSource page
arxivcs.SEcs.AI2026-07-18

Falsification-Based Verification of LLM-Generated Optimization Models: Sound Test Batteries and Their Detection Limits

Haifeng Li, Mo Hai

Large language models now translate natural-language descriptions of decision problems into solver-ready optimization models, but they fail silently. A generated model often runs and still formulates the wrong problem. This paper develops a theory of falsification-based verificat…

View free PDFSource page
arxivcs.NEcs.AI2026-07-06

LLM-Driven Evolutionary Generation of Multi-Objective Bayesian Optimization Algorithms

Georgios Laskaris, Reuben Brasher, Niki van Stein, Elena Raponi, Thomas Bäck, Florian Neukart

Designing effective multi-objective Bayesian optimization (MOBO) algorithms requires balancing many interdependent design choices whose optimal configuration is problem-dependent and typically demands deep expertise. We extend the LLaMEA framework to MOBO, using large language mo…

View free PDFSource page