Optimization modeling is one of the most crucial but technical parts of operations research (OR). To automate the modeling process, existing works have leveraged large language models (LLMs), prompting them to break down tasks into steps for generating variables, constraints, and objectives. However, due to the highly complex mathematical structures inherent in OR problems, standard fixed-step decomposition often fails to achieve high performance. To address this challenge, we introduce OptiTree, a novel tree search approach designed to enhance modeling capabilities for complex problems through adaptive problem decomposition into simpler subproblems. Specifically, we develop a modeling tree that organizes a wide range of OR problems based on their hierarchical problem taxonomy and complexity, with each node representing a problem category and containing relevant high-level modeling thoughts. Given a problem to model, we recurrently search the tree to identify a series of simpler subproblems and synthesize the global modeling thoughts by adaptively integrating the hierarchical thoughts. Experiments show that OptiTree significantly improves the modeling accuracy compared to the state-of-theart, achieving over 10% improvements on the challenging benchmarks.

Large language models (LLMs) have shown remarkable progress in mathematical problem-solving, but evaluation has largely focused on problems that have exact analytical solutions or involve formal proofs, often overlooking approximationbased problems ubiquitous in applied science and engineering. To fill this gap, we build on prior work and present HARDMath2, a dataset of 211 original problems covering the core topics in an introductory graduate applied math class, including boundary-layer analysis, WKB methods, asymptotic solutions of nonlinear partial differential equations, and the asymptotics of oscillatory integrals. This dataset was designed and verified by the students and instructors of a core graduate applied mathematics course at Harvard. We built the dataset through a novel collaborative environment that challenges students to write and refine difficult problems consistent with the class syllabus, peer-validate solutions, test different models, and automatically check LLM-generated solutions against their own answers and numerical ground truths. Evaluation results show that leading frontier models still struggle with many of the problems in the dataset, highlighting a gap in the mathematical reasoning skills of current LLMs. Importantly, students identified strategies to create increasingly difficult problems by interacting with the models and exploiting common failure modes. This back-and-forth with the models not only resulted in a richer and more challenging benchmark but also led to qualitative improvements in the students' understanding of the course material, which is increasingly important as we enter an age where state-of-the-art language models can solve many challenging problems across a wide domain of fields.

Thank you for the suggestion.

Large language models (LLMs) solve complex problems yet fail on simpler variants, suggesting they achieve correct outputs through mechanisms fundamentally different from human reasoning. To understand this gap, we synthesize cognitive science research into a taxonomy of 28 cognitive elements spanning reasoning invariants, meta-cognitive controls, representations for organizing reasoning & knowledge, and transformation operations. We introduce a fine-grained evaluation framework and conduct the first large-scale empirical analysis of 192K traces from 18 models across text, vision, and audio, complemented by 54 human think-aloud traces, which we make publicly available. We find that models under-utilize cognitive elements correlated with success, narrowing to rigid sequential processing on ill-structured problems where diverse representations and meta-cognitive monitoring are critical. Human traces show more abstraction and conceptual processing, while models default to surface-level enumeration. Meta-analysis of 1.6K LLM reasoning papers reveals the research community concentrates on easily quantifiable elements (sequential organization: 55%, decomposition: 60%) but neglecting meta-cognitive controls (self-awareness: 16%) that correlate with success. Models possess behavioral repertoires associated with success but fail to deploy them spontaneously. Leveraging these patterns, we develop test-time reasoning guidance that automatically scaffold successful structures, improving performance by up to 66.7% on complex problems. By establishing a shared vocabulary between cognitive science and LLM research, our framework enables systematic diagnosis of reasoning failures and principled development of models that reason through robust cognitive mechanisms rather than spurious shortcuts, while providing tools to test theories of human cognition at scale.

Cooperative autonomous robotic systems have significant potential for executing complex multi-task missions across space, air, ground, and maritime domains. But they commonly operate in remote, dynamic and hazardous environments, requiring rapid in-mission adaptation without reliance on fragile or slow communication links to centralised compute. Fast, on-board replanning algorithms are therefore needed to enhance resilience. Reinforcement Learning shows strong promise for efficiently solving mission planning tasks when formulated as Travelling Salesperson Problems (TSPs), but existing methods: 1) are unsuitable for replanning, where agents do not start at a single location; 2) do not allow cooperation between agents; 3) are unable to model tasks with variable durations; or 4) lack practical considerations for on-board deployment. Here we define the Cooperative Mission Replanning Problem as a novel variant of multiple TSP with adaptations to overcome these issues, and develop a new encoder/decoder-based model using Graph Attention Networks and Attention Models to solve it effectively and efficiently. Using a simple example of cooperative drones, we show our replanner consistently (90% of the time) maintains performance within 10% of the state-of-the-art LKH3 heuristic solver, whilst running 85-370 times faster on a Raspberry Pi. This work paves the way for increased resilience in autonomous multi-agent systems.

Optimization modeling is one of the most crucial but technical parts of operations research (OR). To automate the modeling process, existing works have leveraged large language models (LLMs), prompting them to break down tasks into steps for generating variables, constraints, and objectives. However, due to the highly complex mathematical structures inherent in OR problems, standard fixed-step decomposition often fails to achieve high performance. To address this challenge, we introduce OptiTree, a novel tree search approach designed to enhance modeling capabilities for complex problems through adaptive problem decomposition into simpler subproblems. Specifically, we develop a modeling tree that organizes a wide range of OR problems based on their hierarchical problem taxonomy and complexity, with each node representing a problem category and containing relevant high-level modeling thoughts. Given a problem to model, we recurrently search the tree to identify a series of simpler subproblems and synthesize the global modeling thoughts by adaptively integrating the hierarchical thoughts. Experiments show that OptiTree significantly improves the modeling accuracy compared to the state-of-the-art, achieving over 10\% improvements on the challenging benchmarks. The code is released at https://github.com/MIRALab-USTC/OptiTree/tree/main.

Complex vehicle routing problems (VRPs) remain a fundamental challenge, demanding substantial expert effort for intent interpretation and algorithm design. While large language models (LLMs) offer a promising path toward automation, current approaches still rely on external intervention, which restrict autonomy and often lead to execution errors and low solution feasibility. To address these challenges, we propose an Agentic Framework with LLMs (AFL) for solving complex vehicle routing problems, achieving full automation from problem instance to solution. AFL directly extracts knowledge from raw inputs and enables self-contained code generation without handcrafted modules or external solvers. To improve trustworthiness, AFL decomposes the overall pipeline into three manageable subtasks and employs four specialized agents whose coordinated interactions enforce cross-functional consistency and logical soundness. Extensive experiments on 60 complex VRPs, ranging from standard benchmarks to practical variants, validate the effectiveness and generality of our framework, showing comparable performance against meticulously designed algorithms. Notably, it substantially outperforms existing LLM-based baselines in both code reliability and solution feasibility, achieving rates close to 100% on the evaluated benchmarks.

On-device deployment of Large Language Models (LLMs) frequently leverages Low-Rank Adapters (LoRAs) to support diverse downstream tasks under tight resource constraints. To address the limited storage capacity of mobile devices, recent works have explored model merging techniques to fuse multiple LoRAs into a single one. In practice, however, LoRAs are often delivered incrementally, as users request support for new tasks (e.g., novel problem types or languages). This scenario introduces a new challenge: on-device online continual merging, where the objective is to incorporate new LoRAs while preserving the performance on previously supported tasks. In this paper, we propose a data-free and computationally efficient strategy for selecting and merging LoRAs when a new one becomes available, assuming the device can store only a limited number of adapters. Extensive experiments across real-world tasks demonstrate the superiority of our approach compared to alternative strategies while adhering to the storage budget and compute limitations of on-device settings.

Large language models have recently made great strides in reasoning task performance through chain-of-thought (CoT) strategies trained via reinforcement learning; however, these "reasoning large language models" (RLLMs) remain imperfect reasoners, and understanding the frequencies and causes of their failure modes is important for both users and developers. We test o1-mini, o3-mini, DeepSeek-R1, Claude 3.7 Sonnet, Gemini 2.5 Pro Preview, and Grok 3 Mini Beta on graph coloring as a variable-complexity constraint-satisfaction logic problem, and find evidence from both error rate comparisons and CoT/explanation text analysis that RLLMs are prone to hallucinate graph edges not specified in the prompt. This phenomenon persists across multiple problem complexity levels and semantic frames, and it appears to account for a significant fraction of the incorrect answers from every tested model, and the vast majority of them for some models. We also validate the generalizability of this input-conflicting hallucination phenomenon with smaller-scale experiments on a type of stable matching problem. Our results indicate that RLLMs may possess broader issues with misrepresentation of problem specifics, and we offer suggestions for design choices to mitigate this weakness.

Large language models (LLMs) demonstrate strong mathematical reasoning, but reliance on closed-source APIs for OR tasks raises privacy concerns, and training open-source models from scratch incurs high compute costs. We introduce OR-Toolformer, which fine-tunes Llama-3.1-8B-Instruct with a semi-automatic data synthesis pipeline that generates diverse OR problem-answer pairs and augments the model with external solvers to produce API calls. On three of four standard benchmarks, OR-Toolformer achieves up to 80.1% execution accuracy, exceeding size-matched baselines by over 4.3%. In zero-shot evaluation on two unseen OR problem types, it attains 54% average accuracy, a 21 percentage-point improvement over the strongest baseline. These findings validate the efficacy of tool-augmented fine-tuning LLMs for accurate and generalizable OR problem modeling and solving.