aiqbench analysis
ReLoop tackles the critical feasibility-correctness gap where LLM-generated optimization code executes but yields semantically wrong results. By combining structured four-stage reasoning with external behavioral verification, it achieves 100% executable rates and significant accuracy gains on complex benchmarks without relying on ground truth data. This work advances reliable AI-driven decision-making by ensuring that generated mathematical formulations align strictly with their intended logical constraints.
ReLoop: Structured Modeling and Behavioral Verification for Reliable LLM-Based Optimization
arXiv:2602.15983v3 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) can translate natural language into optimization code, but silent failures pose a critical risk: code that executes and returns solver-feasible solutions may encode semantically incorrect formulations---a feasibility--correctness gap reaching 90 percentage points on compositional problems. We introduce ReLoop, which addresses this gap through two complementary mechanisms. Structured generation decomposes code production into a four-stage reasoning chain (understand, formalize, synthesize, verify), preventing formulation errors at their source. Behavioral verification detects errors that survive generation by testing whether the formulation responds correctly to solver-based parameter perturbation---an external semantic signal that bypasses LLM self-review and requires no ground truth. The two mechanisms are complementary by error structure: structured generation drives the largest gains on compositional problems (+8.5pp accuracy on RetailOpt-190 with Claude Opus 4.6), while behavioral verification dominates on localized defects +4.4pp on MAMO-ComplexLP, its largest contribution across benchmarks). Combined with diagnostic execution recovery, ReLoop reaches 100% executable code on Claude Opus 4.6 and consistently improves accuracy on chat-tuned foundation models across three benchmarks; we further identify a known limitation of narrowly-tuned SFT models, whose learned output formats are brittle to chain-of-thought prompts---an interaction we document and analyze. We release RetailOpt-190, 190 compositional retail optimization scenarios targeting the multi-constraint interactions where LLMs most frequently fail.
Abstract:Large language models (LLMs) can translate natural language into optimization code, but silent failures pose a critical risk: code that executes and returns solver-feasible solutions may encode semantically incorrect formulations---a feasibility--correctness gap reaching 90 percentage points on compositional problems. We introduce ReLoop, which addresses this gap through two complementary mechanisms. Structured generation decomposes code production into a four-stage reasoning chain (understand, formalize, synthesize, verify), preventing formulation errors at their source. Behavioral verification detects errors that survive generation by testing whether the formulation responds correctly to solver-based parameter perturbation---an external semantic signal that bypasses LLM self-review and requires no ground truth. The two mechanisms are complementary by error structure: structured generation drives the largest gains on compositional problems (+8.5pp accuracy on RetailOpt-190 with Claude Opus 4.6), while behavioral verification dominates on localized defects +4.4pp on MAMO-ComplexLP, its largest contribution across benchmarks). Combined with diagnostic execution recovery, ReLoop reaches 100% executable code on Claude Opus 4.6 and consistently improves accuracy on chat-tuned foundation models across three benchmarks; we further identify a known limitation of narrowly-tuned SFT models, whose learned output formats are brittle to chain-of-thought prompts---an interaction we document and analyze. We release RetailOpt-190, 190 compositional retail optimization scenarios targeting the multi-constraint interactions where LLMs most frequently fail.
Software Engineering (cs.SE); Artificial Intelligence (cs.AI); Machine Learning (cs.LG); Optimization and Control (math.OC)
arXiv:2602.15983 [cs.SE]
(or arXiv:2602.15983v3 [cs.SE] for this version)
https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2602.15983 Focus to learn more arXiv-issued DOI via DataCite
arXivLabs is a framework that allows collaborators to develop and share new arXiv features directly on our website.
Both individuals and organizations that work with arXivLabs have embraced and accepted our values of openness, community, excellence, and user data privacy. arXiv is committed to these values and only works with partners that adhere to them.
Have an idea for a project that will add value for arXiv's community? Learn more about arXivLabs.
Full text under the publisher's open licence · 308 words
Related coverage

[AINews] not much happened today
Latent Space · Sep 18, 2026

Mastering Agentic Techniques: AI Agent Customization
NVIDIA · May 20, 2026

News
Quantum Computing Report · Jun 7, 2026
Coverage-driven alignment - What ‘Teaching Claude Why’ can borrow from AV verification
LessWrong · Jun 8, 2026