# Models Can Model, But Can't Bind: Structured Grounding in Text-to-Optimization

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2605.21751 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2605.21751/

## Key facts

- Cited by 1 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Builds on 22 of its 33 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 20 May 2026.

## Builds on (most cited first, 22 of 22)

- [DeepSeekMath: Pushing the Limits of Mathematical Reasoning in Open Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2402.03300/) (2024)
- [Efficient Memory Management for Large Language Model Serving with PagedAttention](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2309.06180/) (2023)
- [Lost in the Middle: How Language Models Use Long Contexts](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2307.03172/) (2023)
- [HybridFlow: A Flexible and Efficient RLHF Framework](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2409.19256/) (2024)
- [Scaling LLM Test-Time Compute Optimally can be More Effective than Scaling Model Parameters](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2408.03314/) (2024)
- [LlamaFactory: Unified Efficient Fine-Tuning of 100+ Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2403.13372/) (2024)
- [RULER: What's the Real Context Size of Your Long-Context Language Models?](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2404.06654/) (2024)
- [Program of Thoughts Prompting: Disentangling Computation from Reasoning for Numerical Reasoning Tasks](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2211.12588/) (2022)
- [Large Language Monkeys: Scaling Inference Compute with Repeated Sampling](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2407.21787/) (2024)
- [Teaching Large Language Models to Self-Debug](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2304.05128/) (2023)
- [NL4Opt Competition: Formulating Optimization Problems Based on Their Natural Language Descriptions](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2303.08233/) (2023)
- [ORLM: A Customizable Framework in Training Large Models for Automated Optimization Modeling](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2405.17743/) (2024)
- [OptiMUS: Scalable Optimization Modeling with (MI)LP Solvers and Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2402.10172/) (2024)
- [SynLogic: Synthesizing Verifiable Reasoning Data at Scale for Learning Logical Reasoning and Beyond](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2505.19641/) (2025)
- [LLMs for Mathematical Modeling: Towards Bridging the Gap between Natural and Mathematical Languages](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2405.13144/) (2024)
- [A Survey of Optimization Modeling Meets LLMs: Progress and Future Directions](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2508.10047/) (2025)
- [OR-LLM-Agent: Automating Modeling and Solving of Operations Research Optimization Problems with Reasoning LLM](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2503.10009/) (2025)
- [Intrinsic Entropy of Context Length Scaling in LLMs](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2502.01481/) (2025)
- [Evaluating LLM Reasoning in the Operations Research Domain with ORQA](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2412.17874/) (2024)
- [SolverLLM: Leveraging Test-Time Scaling for Optimization Problem via LLM-Guided Search](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2510.16916/) (2025)
- [OPT-Engine: Benchmarking the Limits of LLMs in Optimization Modeling via Complexity Scaling](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2601.19924/) (2026)
- [FLAMES: Improving LLM Math Reasoning via a Fine-Grained Analysis of the Data Synthesis Pipeline](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2508.16514/) (2025)

## Built on by (most cited first, 1 of 1)

- [SLAI T-Rex: Full-Parameter Post-training of the DeepSeek-V4 Family on Ascend SuperPOD](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2607.20145/) (2026)

## Abstract (arXiv)

Text-to-optimization requires two separable capabilities: modeling -- choosing the right optimization structure -- and binding -- grounding every coefficient, index, and parameter in the concrete problem data. We study this via Text2Opt-Bench, a scalable benchmark of solver-verified optimization problems spanning 12 categories, from textbook linear programs to stochastic and multi-objective formulations with up to thousands of variables. Across 10+ models, we find that accuracy collapses as instance data grows, even when the formulation itself is simple. We call this the effective binding limit. We study it with a family of techniques, BIND, that externalize numeric data to structured files so the model binds data programmatically rather than transcribing from the prompt. When using an oracle for externalizing data, we recover between 12 and 27 accuracy points, confirming binding as a key -- but recoverable -- failure mode. In a deployable setting without oracle access, we validate our hypothesis by finetuning a model exclusively on binding and show that it outperforms end-to-end SFT and RL across three structurally distinct optimization categories, with a 1.5B binding specialist alone matching a 7B end-to-end baseline.