Enterprise AI Analysis: Deconstructing LLM "Sense-Making" in Complex Problem Solving
Actionable insights from the research paper "Large Language Models Don't Make Sense of Word Problems" by Anselm R. Strohmaier et al. for building robust, reliable enterprise AI.
Executive Summary: The Hidden Risk in Enterprise AI
A groundbreaking scoping review by Strohmaier and colleagues reveals a critical vulnerability in modern Large Language Models (LLMs): while they demonstrate near-perfect performance on standard, predictable problems, they fundamentally lack the ability to "make sense" of real-world context, ambiguity, and nonsensical information. For enterprises, this translates to a significant operational risk. An AI that aces standardized benchmarks might fail spectacularly when faced with the messy, unpredictable "edge cases" that define real business operations.
This analysis breaks down the paper's findings into a strategic framework for business leaders, highlighting why a shift from generic benchmarks to custom, context-aware validation is essential for deploying trustworthy AI in mission-critical applications.
Key Takeaways for Your AI Strategy:
- The "S-Problem" Trap: Most AI benchmarks test for "standard problems" (S-Problems) with clear inputs and predictable solutions. The research shows LLMs are trained extensively on these, creating an illusion of deep competence.
- The "Sense-Making" Gap: LLMs don't build a mental model of a situation like humans do. They perform a sophisticated form of pattern matching ("direct translation"), making them blind to contextual absurdities that a human would spot instantly.
- The P-Problem Imperative: "Problematic problems" (P-Problems)those requiring real-world knowledge, assumption-checking, or identifying flawed dataare where LLMs falter. These are precisely the high-stakes scenarios common in enterprise settings like fraud detection, supply chain logistics, and complex customer service.
- Beyond Benchmarks: Relying on off-the-shelf LLM performance metrics is insufficient. OwnYourAI advocates for creating custom evaluation suites based on your organization's unique P-Problems to truly measure an AI's readiness for deployment.
The Two Faces of AI Performance: S-Problems vs. P-Problems in Business
The paper's central distinction between "S-Problems" and "P-Problems" provides a powerful lens for evaluating enterprise AI readiness. Understanding this difference is the first step toward mitigating risk and building more resilient systems.
The Enterprise AI Training Bias: Why LLMs are Conditioned for Predictable Tasks
The research reviewed 213 studies and found that the datasets used to train and evaluate LLMs are overwhelmingly dominated by S-Problems. This creates a powerful training bias, optimizing models for tasks that are easily quantifiable but not necessarily representative of real-world complexity. The chart below, inspired by Figure 3 in the paper, illustrates the prevalence of the most popular S-Problem-heavy datasets.
Frequency of Top Word-Problem Datasets in LLM Research (%)
This focus on S-Problems means that out-of-the-box LLMs are experts in a narrow, predictable world. To be effective in your unique business environment, they must be rigorously tested and often fine-tuned on the P-Problems that define your industry's challenges.
Deep Dive: How LLMs "Solve" Problems (and Why It Matters for Your Business)
The core reason for the performance gap lies in the fundamentally different processes humans and LLMs use to solve problems. Humans build a "situation model"a mental representation of the context. LLMs, by contrast, perform what the paper calls "direct translation," converting token patterns into solution patterns without an intermediate layer of understanding.
Business Implication: The High Cost of No Common Sense
An LLM might correctly process a quarterly sales report and generate accurate projections (an S-Problem). However, if the introductory text of that same report contained a nonsensical premise (e.g., "assuming sales in our non-existent Martian colony reach $10 million"), the LLM would likely incorporate that absurdity into its analysis without question. This "sense-making gap" can lead to flawed strategies, compliance failures, and significant financial loss. A robust enterprise AI must have mechanisms to detect and flag such contextual anomalies.
Performance Under Pressure: A Comparative Analysis of Modern LLMs
The paper's empirical evaluation tested five OpenAI models, from GPT-3.5 to the then-unreleased GPT-5, on a mix of S-Problems and P-Problems. The results are stark, clearly showing that while performance on standard tasks is reaching saturation, the ability to handle context-dependent problems remains a significant challenge even for the most advanced models.
LLM Performance Across Different Problem Sets
The table below reconstructs data from Table 6 of the study, showing the percentage of "acceptable answers" for each model on different types of problem corpora. Notice the sharp performance drop on the "Classical P-Problems," which are specifically designed to test for sense-making.
Model Performance: Acceptable Answer Rate (%)
LLM Response Strategies to Ambiguity
Even more revealing is *how* the models fail. The study categorized answers into types like "Solved," "Addressed" (acknowledged the problem's weirdness), and "Declined" (refused to answer a nonsensical question). The interactive chart below, based on Figure 4, shows how different models react to different problem types. For enterprises, an AI that attempts to solve a nonsensical problem is often more dangerous than one that flags it for human review.
How LLMs Respond to Different Problem Types
The key insight is that even the most advanced models frequently attempt to provide a numerical answer to non-sensical or weird problems, demonstrating a critical lack of self-awareness. An enterprise-grade solution requires guardrails that force the AI to recognize the limits of its understanding and escalate to human experts.
The OwnYourAI Enterprise Implementation Roadmap for Reliable AI
Based on the paper's findings, deploying a "raw" LLM for any complex task is a high-risk gamble. A strategic, multi-layered approach is required to build a system that is not only powerful but also reliable and trustworthy. Our implementation roadmap is designed to bridge the sense-making gap.
ROI of Context-Aware AI: Mitigating Risk and Unlocking Value
The value of a robust AI system isn't just in automating repetitive tasks (S-Problems); it's in preventing costly errors on complex, high-stakes decisions (P-Problems). A single error in a critical domain like financial compliance, medical diagnostics, or engineering safety can negate years of efficiency gains. Our approach focuses on building AI that adds value by knowing what it doesn't know.
Use our interactive calculator to estimate the potential ROI of implementing a custom, context-aware AI solution designed to reduce errors on your business's unique "P-Problems."
Conclusion: Your Path to Truly Intelligent Automation
The research by Strohmaier et al. serves as a critical wake-up call for the enterprise world. Off-the-shelf LLMs have perfected the art of solving problems without understanding them. While astonishing, this capability is also a liability. True, sustainable business value will be captured not by those who simply adopt LLMs, but by those who strategically engineer them into robust, context-aware systems that can navigate the complexities of the real world.
The path forward is clear: move beyond generic benchmarks, identify and test against your unique operational challenges, and build systems with the necessary guardrails for reliability. This is the foundation of truly intelligent automation.
Ready to Get Started?
Book Your Free Consultation.
Let's Discuss Your AI Strategy!
Lets Discuss Your Needs
Select a Date
Sun
Mon
Tue
Wed
Thu
Fri
Sat