AI News HubLIVE
原文

Constraint acquisition needs better benchmarks

Constraint Acquisition (CA) and related research on Mathematical Programming (MP) model validation and enhancement are limited by inadequate benchmarks. Existing benchmarks are designed for solver evaluation, lacking domain knowledge artifacts. This work presents MPMMine, a benchmark suite guided by consistency, standardization, completeness, extensibility, openness, and version control. It uses open formats (MiniZinc, CommonMark, JSON) and provides multiple models per problem, tens of instances per model, and thousands of solutions and non-solutions in integer and continuous domains, along with natural-language descriptions.

Article intelligence

InvestorsAdvanced

Key points

  • CA research is hindered by insufficient benchmarks, affecting reproducibility and comparability.
  • Existing benchmarks are solver-oriented and lack domain knowledge artifacts.
  • MPMMine benchmark suite emphasizes consistency, standardization, open formats, and diverse data including natural-language descriptions.
  • MPMMine provides multiple models, tens of instances per model, and thousands of solutions/non-solutions in integer and continuous domains.

Why it matters

This matters because CA research is hindered by insufficient benchmarks, affecting reproducibility and comparability.

Technical impact

May affect model selection, inference cost, product capability, and evaluation benchmarks.

[2605.26279] Constraint acquisition needs better benchmarks

[Submitted on 25 May 2026]

Title:Constraint acquisition needs better benchmarks

View a PDF of the paper titled Constraint acquisition needs better benchmarks, by Rafa{\l} Stachowiak and 1 other authors

View PDF HTML (experimental)

Abstract:Constraint Acquisition (CA) and related research on the validation and enhancement of Mathematical Programming (MP) models from domain knowledge artifacts are currently limited by inadequate benchmarks. This deficiency impedes reproducibility and cross-study comparability, slowing the maturation of CA methods. Existing benchmarks were designed for solver evaluation rather than for assessing CA algorithms. They are loosely organized, treat individual problems inconsistently, and omit the domain knowledge artifacts required by CA methods. This work presents MPMMine, a benchmark suite designed to assess algorithms that discover, validate, and enhance MP models using diverse domain knowledge artifacts. MPMMine is guided by consistency, standardization, completeness, extensibility, openness, and version control. It adopts a uniform structure and relies on open formats: MiniZinc, CommonMark, and JSON. It provides multiple models per problem, tens of instances per model, and thousands of solutions and non-solutions in both integer and continuous domains, alongside natural-language descriptions to support text-to-model methods.

Comments: 12 pages, 1 figure, for the associated dataset, see this https URL

Subjects:

Artificial Intelligence (cs.AI); Computational Engineering, Finance, and Science (cs.CE)

MSC classes: 90C90 (Primary), 90C05 (Secondary)

ACM classes: I.6.3; I.2.2; I.2.7

Cite as: arXiv:2605.26279 [cs.AI]

(or arXiv:2605.26279v1 [cs.AI] for this version)

https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2605.26279

arXiv-issued DOI via DataCite (pending registration)

Submission history

From: Tomasz Pawlak [view email] [v1] Mon, 25 May 2026 19:05:12 UTC (801 KB)

Full-text links:

Access Paper:

View a PDF of the paper titled Constraint acquisition needs better benchmarks, by Rafa{\l} Stachowiak and 1 other authors

View PDF

HTML (experimental)

TeX Source

view license

Current browse context:

cs.AI

new | recent | 2026-05

Change to browse by:

cs cs.CE

References & Citations

NASA ADS

Google Scholar

Semantic Scholar

Loading...

Data provided by:

Bibliographic Tools

Bibliographic and Citation Tools

Bibliographic Explorer Toggle

Bibliographic Explorer (What is the Explorer?)

Connected Papers Toggle

Connected Papers (What is Connected Papers?)

Litmaps Toggle

Litmaps (What is Litmaps?)

scite.ai Toggle

scite Smart Citations (What are Smart Citations?)

Code, Data, Media

Code, Data and Media Associated with this Article

alphaXiv Toggle

alphaXiv (What is alphaXiv?)

Links to Code Toggle

CatalyzeX Code Finder for Papers (What is CatalyzeX?)

DagsHub Toggle

DagsHub (What is DagsHub?)

GotitPub Toggle

Gotit.pub (What is GotitPub?)

Huggingface Toggle

Hugging Face (What is Huggingface?)

ScienceCast Toggle

ScienceCast (What is ScienceCast?)

Demos

Demos

Replicate Toggle

Replicate (What is Replicate?)

Spaces Toggle

Hugging Face Spaces (What is Spaces?)

Spaces Toggle

TXYZ.AI (What is TXYZ.AI?)

Related Papers

Recommenders and Search Tools

Link to Influence Flower

Influence Flower (What are Influence Flowers?)

Core recommender toggle

CORE Recommender (What is CORE?)

Author

Venue

Institution

Topic

About arXivLabs

arXivLabs: experimental projects with community collaborators

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.

Which authors of this paper are endorsers? | Disable MathJax (What is MathJax?)