Chenguang Wang

2papers

2 Papers

7.9LGJun 22
GRIMIP: A General Framework for Instance-Specific Configuration of MIP Solvers Using LLMs

Yidong Luo, Xuemin Chen, Chenguang Wang et al.

Configuring the hyperparameters of Mixed-integer programming (MIP) solvers is a high-dimensional, instance-dependent optimization problem where suboptimal settings can degrade solving time by orders of magnitude. Default configurations are often suboptimal, while traditional tuning methods either suffer from the ``cold-start'' problem and inefficient search or heavily rely on expert experience. This paper introduces \textbf{GRIMIP} (\textbf{\underline{G}}eneral \textbf{\underline{R}}easoning for \textbf{\underline{I}}nstance-specific \textbf{\underline{MIP}} configuration), a novel hybrid intelligence framework that synergistically integrates the semantic reasoning capabilities of Large Language Models (LLMs) with the sample-efficient search of Bayesian Optimization (BO). GRIMIP enables the LLM to function as a complete probabilistic surrogate within the BO loop, significantly improving performance and reducing sampling and evaluation costs. On seven benchmarks including MIPLIB, GRIMIP achieves over 40\% reduction in Primal-Dual Integral on hard instances, outperforming SMAC and other LLM-assisted BO methods. By granting LLMs sufficient autonomy, GRIMIP combines the expert-level reasoning of LLMs with the efficient search of BO, achieving state-of-the-art performance.

18.4AIJun 19
ChainWorld: Composing Long-Horizon Desktop Workloads from Atomic OSWorld Tasks

Vincent Siu, Manasi Sharma, Dawn Song et al.

Computer use agents are evaluated almost exclusively on atomic desktop tasks, but realistic desktop work requires sustaining state across multiple objectives. We study this gap with ChainWorld, which composes atomic OSWorld tasks into long horizon desktop workloads through directional compatibility search while preserving the source evaluators. The resulting workload contains 347 chains of length two to four and compares two renderings of the same task sequence. In single turn evaluation, all tasks are presented together in one prompt. In multi turn evaluation, tasks are revealed one at a time. Across four current computer use agents, maximum chain completion is 31%. Multi turn evaluation improves completion for three models, but both protocols remain challenging. The two protocols also expose different failure profiles. Single turn failures concentrate on artifact precision, while multi turn failures more often reflect session management problems such as fragmented progress and later turn disengagement.