Papers › Evaluating LLM Reasoning in the Operations Research Domain with ORQA

Evaluating LLM Reasoning in the Operations Research Domain with ORQA

22 Dec 2024arXiv:2412.17874archive 2025-07-28

Mahdi Mostajabdaveh, Timothy T. Yu, Samarendra Chandan Bindu Dash, Rindranirina Ramamonjison, Jabo Serge Byusa, Giuseppe Carenini, Zirui Zhou, Yong Zhang

In this paper, we introduce and apply Operations Research Question Answering (ORQA), a new benchmark designed to assess the generalization capabilities of Large Language Models (LLMs) in the specialized technical domain of Operations Research (OR). This benchmark evaluates whether LLMs can emulate the knowledge and reasoning skills of OR experts when confronted with diverse and complex optimization problems. The dataset, developed by OR experts, features real-world optimization problems that demand multistep reasoning to construct their mathematical models. Our evaluations of various open source LLMs, such as LLaMA 3.1, DeepSeek, and Mixtral, reveal their modest performance, highlighting a gap in their ability to generalize to specialized technical domains. This work contributes to the ongoing discourse on LLMs generalization capabilities, offering valuable insights for future research in this area. The dataset and evaluation code are publicly available.

PaperPDFCode

In Syntology Open this paper in Syntology's Atlas, the map of the papers in Syntology's graph and their citations.

Code

nl4opt/ORQA officialmentioned on GitHub report
nl4opt/nl4opt-competition mentioned on GitHubMIT report

Repository list and official/mentioned flags are the archive's, frozen 2025-07-28. Reachability, where shown, is from one Syntology probe window (2026-09-16 to 2026-09-18); repositories not probed show nothing. GitHub stars are not tracked.

Code Syntology ran Syntology

Not run by Syntology. Nothing on this page verifies that the listed code works.

Tasks

Question Answering

Results from the paper archive 2025-07-28

No leaderboard rows for this paper in the archive.

Methods

LLaMA

Report a problem or propose a change · a person checks every report against the paper or source before anything changes; decisions are listed on /corrections