JOR-Bench is a solver-independent benchmark that can be used with any solver or programming language, and consists of pairs of Japanese problem statements and expected numerical answers, which show that OR formulation ability is largely language-neutral for strong multilingual models.
Abstract
We present JOR-Bench, a collection of five Japanese-language benchmarks for evaluating the ability of large language models (LLMs) to formulate and solve operations research (OR) problems. Each benchmark is a Japanese translation of an existing English benchmark: IndustryOR, MAMO Complex LP, NL4OPT, OptiBench, and OptMATH, covering 1,319 problems spanning linear programming, mixed-integer programming, non-linear programming, and combinatorial optimization. JOR-Bench is a solver-independent benchmark that can be used with any solver or programming language, and consists of pairs of Japanese problem statements and expected numerical answers. We evaluate seven LLMs, including multilingual general-purpose models and Japanese-specialized models, on both the original English and the new Japanese versions, and compare performance across languages. For the main evaluation, we standardize execution with the Python interface to OR-Tools to make model outputs comparable and reproducible with open-source software. Our results show that OR formulation ability is largely language-neutral for strong multilingual models; the overall average accuracy difference between English and Japanese is only $-0.3$ pp. Yet error analysis reveals subtle cross-lingual differences, including a pragmatic disambiguation failure in some domains that causes models to output decision-variable values instead of the objective value when the prompt is in Japanese.
Large language models (LLMs) have achieved remarkable success in high-resource languages, yet their performance on Traditional Mongolian remains highly limited. A primary bottleneck is the absence of a systematic evaluation framework, which precludes quantitative comparison and obscures directions for model optimizatio...
Zhenjie Gao, Feilong Bao, Aruukhan Bai et al.· Annual International ACM SIG...· 0 citations
Reasoning Language Models (RLMs) achieve their strongest performance when they reason in English, the language for which reasoning-oriented training data is most abundant. However, reasoning trace is a clue for model interpretability and safety, and useful in practice for both the model users and for model developers....
Mathematical reasoning has become a central task for evaluating and tuning reasoning Large Language Models (LLMs), yet existing benchmarks remain heavily biased toward high-resource languages, with English and Chinese dominating both pre-training corpora and evaluation suites. The recently released PolyMath (Wang et al...
Daryna Dementieva, N. Babakov, Kathy Hammerl et al.· 0 citations
Overall, statistic synthesis is much easier than map synthesis, some collections remain near-zero, long prompts cause a sharp accuracy cliff, and exact symbolic rule induction remains brittle.
We present L3Cube-IndicQuest v2, a large-scale gold-standard multilingual question-answering benchmark for evaluating the India-specific factual knowledge of Large Language Models (LLMs). The benchmark comprises 3,471 curriculum-grounded English question--answer pairs spanning nine domains, curated from educational cur...
Rinit Jain, Tirthraj Mahajan, Advait Joshi et al.· 0 citations
This work investigates whether LLMs can accurately judge functional equivalence across different programming languages in human-written code, a setting that requires deeper reasoning beyond superficial similarity, and identifies a difficulty-dependent breakdown in equivalence judgment.
Hui Sun, Anderson G. Uchôa, Rohit Gheyi et al.· 2 citations
We use cookies to run the site and, with your consent, for analytics and to show ads.
See our Cookie Policy.