Benchmark results, September 2026

Better answers than the best solvers published

Nook is NukkAI's constraint solver. We measured it against the best solutions ever published, and against the leading academic and commercial solvers on the same machine.

nook against Hexaly over a 60-second run Mean extra distance over the best known plan on 11 standard vehicle-routing problems. Hexaly, on eight threads, leads for the first seconds. From 6.25 seconds nook, on one thread, is ahead and finishes at +0.42% against Hexaly’s +1.05%. 0% 2% 4% 6% 0 s 1 s 5 s 15 s 30 s 60 s At 6.25 s, nook takes the lead Hexaly, 8 threads +1.05% nook, 1 thread +0.42%
Vehicle routing on 11 standard benchmark problems, 60-second run. Extra distance over the best known plan; lower is better.

What the benchmarks show

Routing, scheduling and network problems from the research benchmarks that academic and commercial solvers measure themselves against.

7 of 8
FrontierCO problems where Nook beats the best AI code-writing agent, in a twelfth of its time.
10 of 10
city-scale delivery problems where Nook plans shorter routes than HGS-CVRP, the academic state of art.
2.5×
closer to the best known route than the commercial solver Hexaly, on one thread against its eight.
173
solutions better than any ever published, on benchmarks research groups have studied for years.

How to read a gap

Most large problems have never been solved to a proven optimum. So every solver is scored against the best solution anyone has published: the gap is how far its answer sits above that, in percent.

Lower is better. 0% matches the best known solution, and a negative gap beats it: a new record.

A gap scale: below zero beats the best known solution, zero matches it, above zero is further away. Example: nook at +0.42%, Hexaly at +1.05%. Best known: 0% Below 0%: a record Above 0%: further from the best −1%0% +1%+2% nook +0.42% Hexaly +1.05%

Results by problem

Every comparison ran on one machine, with the same time limit for each solver.

Ahead of the best AI agent on 7 of 8 problems

FrontierCO (2025) sets eight classic optimisation problems at frontier scale, up to millions of nodes. The published methods had one hour per instance; Nook had five minutes on one core.

ProblemnookClassical specialistBest LLM agentnook vs agent
Dominating setMDS−4.02%+0.63%+5.71%−9.73 pts
Flexible job shopFJSP+1.05%+0.01%+1.14%−0.09 pts
Independent setMIS+2.31%+2.65%+4.02%−1.71 pts
Steiner treeSTP+3.49%+0.50%+5.82%−2.33 pts
Facility locationCFLP+4.49%+0.01%+7.41%−2.92 pts
Vehicle routingCVRP+2.12%+6.74%+6.52%−4.40 pts
Travelling salesmanTSP+9.33%+2.89%+32.00%−22.67 pts
p-median locationCPMP+881%+0.32%+74.05%+807 pts

Hard instances, gap above FrontierCO’s reference, mean over every instance and 3 seeds. nook ran 300 s, published methods 3,600 s. p-median ran at 60 s: our construction does not yet scale past about 10,000 nodes. On dominating set, independent set and vehicle routing, nook also beats the classical specialist. All 627 solutions pass FrontierCO’s evaluator and an independent checker.

City-scale routing: shorter plans than HGS-CVRP on 10 of 10

With 3,000 to 30,000 customers and the same 300 seconds on the same machine, nook's routes average 2.1% more distance than the best known. HGS-CVRP's average 7.6%.

  • nook, mean +2.12%
  • HGS-CVRP 2.0.0, mean +7.62%
Extra distance over the best known plan after 300 seconds on 10 city-scale problems: nook is closer than HGS-CVRP on all 10. 0% 3% 6% 9% 12% 15% Leuven1 HGS-CVRP +2.84% on Leuven1 nook +0.86% on Leuven1 +2.84 Leuven2 HGS-CVRP +5.96% on Leuven2 nook +1.77% on Leuven2 +5.96 Antwerp1 HGS-CVRP +3.70% on Antwerp1 nook +1.16% on Antwerp1 +3.70 Antwerp2 HGS-CVRP +10.31% on Antwerp2 nook +2.32% on Antwerp2 +10.31 Ghent1 HGS-CVRP +5.71% on Ghent1 nook +1.47% on Ghent1 +5.71 Ghent2 HGS-CVRP +9.11% on Ghent2 nook +2.81% on Ghent2 +9.11 Brussels1 HGS-CVRP +7.80% on Brussels1 nook +2.18% on Brussels1 +7.80 Brussels2 HGS-CVRP +10.53% on Brussels2 nook +3.44% on Brussels2 +10.53 Flanders1 HGS-CVRP +6.26% on Flanders1 nook +1.41% on Flanders1 +6.26 Flanders2 HGS-CVRP +13.95% on Flanders2 nook +3.83% on Flanders2 +13.95

Extra distance over the best known plan after 300 s, each solver run three times, setup time excluded for both. The bigger the problem, the wider the lead: below 600 customers HGS-CVRP is 0.2 to 0.4 points closer; above 600, nook is better on 21 of 23 standard-benchmark problems.

Level with the specialist, and there in seconds

On FrontierCO's 16 hard independent-set instances, nook ran beside KaMIS, the specialised solver, on the same machine for the same 300 seconds.

  • nook closer: 10
  • Tie: 3
  • KaMIS closer: 3
+2.35%nook’s mean gap to the best known set, against +2.95% for KaMIS v3.2.
12 of 16instances where nook reaches KaMIS’s final 300-second answer within 3 seconds.
0.00%on frb59-26-5: nook matches the best known set, where KaMIS sits 3.51% away.

The best schedule on 5 of 6, and three new records

RG300 is the hardest standard set for project scheduling: 480 projects of 300 activities, 347 never solved to proven optimality. Project length after 60 seconds; shorter is better.

InstancePublished recordnookHexaly 14.5CP-SAT, 8 cores
RG300_15193193.0196.0195.7
RG300_43165169.0168.0166.7
RG300_183325324.3Record325.0327.0
RG300_291836835.0Record867.0888.0
RG300_30114891494.31503.01521.0
RG300_397865864.3Record882.0913.0
Mean gap to record+0.40%+1.66%+2.82%

Mean of 3 seeds. Highlighted: best schedule of the three solvers. Across all 480 instances with 60 s each, nook finishes +1.17% above the published records; on the 133 with a proven optimum, +0.25%, hitting it exactly on 89. Published values: RCPLIB v2.4.