mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

Why Not? Solver-Grounded Certificates for Explainable Mission Planning

arXiv 2603.00469 ↗First posted 28 Feb 2026cs.AI math.OCcited by 1

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Operators of Earth observation satellites need justifications for scheduling decisions: why a request was selected, rejected, or what changes would make it schedulable. Existing approaches construct post-hoc reasoning layers independent of the optimizer, risking non-causal attributions, incomplete constraint conjunctions, and solver-path dependence. We take a faithfulness-first approach: every explanation is a certificate derived from the optimization model itself: minimal infeasible subsets for rejections, tight constraints and contrastive trade-offs for selections, and inverse solves for what-if queries. On a scheduling instance with structurally distinct constraint interactions, certificates achieve perfect soundness with respect to the solver's constraint model (15/15 cited-constraint checks), counterfactual validity (7/7), and stability (Jaccard = 1.0 across 28 seed-pairs), while a post-hoc baseline produces non-causal attributions in 29% of cases and misses constraint conjunctions in every multi-cause rejection. A scalability analysis up to 200 orders and 30 satellites confirms practical extraction times for operational batches.

Key facts. Cited by 1 paper in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 2 of its 16 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 28 Feb 2026.

Builds on

2 of 16 references.

References · 2

  1. 2020A framework for step-wise explaining how to solve constraint satisfaction problemscited by 8
  2. 2023Efficiently Explaining CSPs with Unsatisfiable Subset Optimization (extended algorithms and examples)cited by 5

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 14 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2026: 1.

1 paper.