Searcharxiv⌕ Search

arXiv · 2611.08837

Solver-Admitted Metamorphic Testing of Learned Network Optimization Surrogates

Abstract

Equivalent encodings of an optimization problem can produce different learned predictions. Interpreting these differences requires accounting for numerical error and multiple optima. We construct metamorphic tests for optimization solver surrogates with explicit eligibility conditions, output alignment, and numerical thresholds. Reference-solver agreement and independent constraint checks determine which sampled pairs enter the audit. We study alternating-current optimal power flow (AC-OPF), the traveling salesman problem (TSP), the capacitated vehicle routing problem (CVRP), and maximum independent set (MIS). Across five grids, GridSFM-Open violates each of 13 relations on at least one grid, and 12 by more than twice the threshold. Randomly initialized copies of the grid models fail nearly the same relations, so the failures do not require training. Source patches and input canonicalization remove selected discrepancies, but no intervention establishes preserved accuracy and feasibility within the declared margin on every grid. In routing, Policy Optimization with Multiple Optima (POMO) has a single-pass rotation/reflection violation rate that rises from 12.7% to 89.5% between 20 and 100 cities. Graph-Based Diffusion Solvers for Combinatorial Optimization (DIFUSCO) violates the MIS disjoint-union relation on 35.6% of draws. Post hoc normalization within connected components removes these violations on the tested graphs. These findings support reporting metamorphic consistency alongside optimality, feasibility, and accuracy, and validating repair quality separately from consistency.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Vineet Jagadeesan Nair, Stephen Peng, Arun Ravindran. 2026-11-06. Solver-Admitted Metamorphic Testing of Learned Network Optimization Surrogates. https://arxiv.org/abs/2611.08837

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

Limit Analysis for Symbolic Multi-step Reasoning Tasks with Information Propagation Rules Based on Transformers

Transformers are able to perform reasoning tasks, however the intrinsic mechanism remains widely open. In this paper we propose a set of information propagation rules based on Transformers and utilize symbolic reasoning tasks to theoretically analyze the limit reasoning steps. We show that the limit number of reasoning steps is between $2^{L-1}-1$ and $\frac{3^{L-1}-1}{2}$ for a model with $L$ attention layers in a single-pass. In addition, we find that, for problems with a fixed number of reasoning steps, Transformers exhibit a preference for generating sequences that satisfy certain ordering relations. Ultimately, we construct a Transformer and prove that the limiting reasoning depth is achievable.

cs.AI↗

Counterfactual Distillation: Internalizing Reflective Experience into LLM Agent

Large language models increasingly act as autonomous agents in long-horizon interactions, learning from final outcomes and environmental feedback. However, optimizing from such interaction experience remains challenging, as feedback is heterogeneous and rarely carries explicit reward information. Existing post-training approaches rely on outcome-driven methods, such as reinforcement learning with verifiable rewards (RLVR), which primarily exploit final success signals while leaving interaction experience and feedback underutilized. In sparse-reward, long-horizon tasks, this often results in distribution sharpening: the policy reinforces a narrow set of already-successful behaviors, without substantially improving the feedback-grounded agency needed for broader problem-solving capacity (e.g., Pass@k). We propose Counterfactual Distillation, a framework that converts exploration-derived experience into trainable policy supervision. Specifically, we organize exploration as a tree-structured search process, where the agent reflects on past decision points and makes new experience-guided decisions to form alternative branches. These corrections are then distilled as counterfactual targets: we train the model to predict the revised action from the original history without explicitly providing the experience, thereby introducing out-of-distribution behavior patterns and expanding exploration capacity. Across diverse interactive coding and agentic tasks, our method outperforms outcome-driven baselines such as GRPO and experience-based methods such as Early Experience, with gains of up to 14 percentage points over the base model on Pass@128. When interleaved with reinforcement learning updates, it further raises the performance ceiling, improving Pass@1 on Sokoban by 8 percentage points over extended GRPO. Our code is available at https://github.com/motigrez/Counterfactual-Distillation.

cs.AI↗

Taming the Centaur(s) with LAPITHS: a framework for a theoretically grounded interpretation of AI performances

We introduce a framework called LAPITHS (Language model Analysis through Paradigm grounded Interpretations of Theses about Human likenesS) and use it to show that several major claims advanced by models such as CENTAUR, proposed as an artificial Unified Model of Cognition, are not theoretically or empirically justified. LAPITHS provides a principled reference point for counteracting the current behaviouristic tendency in AI research to interpret the human level performances of transformer based language models as evidence of human like underlying computation and, by extension, as signs of cognitive abilities. The novelty of LAPITHS lies in making explicit the arguments grounded in two quantitative assessments: (i) the Minimal Cognitive Grid, a theoretically motivated method for estimating the cognitive plausibility of artificial systems, and (ii) a behavioural comparison showing that results similar to those reported for CENTAUR like models can be reproduced by other systems that do not satisfy the structural constraints typically associated with cognitive plausibility, and whose outputs do not provide independent explanatory insight into human cognition.

cs.AI↗