mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

Understanding Decision-Making Mechanisms in Neural Routing Solvers

arXiv 2609.36063 ↗First posted 28 Sep 2026cs.LG cs.AIcited by 0

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Neural Combinatorial Optimization (NCO) has achieved strong empirical success, yet the internal mechanisms driving model decisions remain largely unexplored. In this paper, we investigate three representative autoregressive NCO models spanning two encoder-decoder configurations: AM and POMO (heavy-encoder, light-decoder), and LEHD (light-encoder, heavy-decoder). Through behavioral analyses, representation probing, and causal interventions, we examine how these models construct solutions and use internal representations during decoding. Our results suggest that AM and POMO predominantly follow a persistent geometric pattern throughout solution construction, whereas LEHD contains linearly accessible information about multiple future actions. Causal experiments further provide evidence for the role of future-node representations in LEHD's decision-making. We also observe that LEHD relies strongly on the current-node representation for immediate local decisions, while the start-node representation plays a broader navigational role over the subsequent route. Cross-instance alignment analyses additionally indicate that LEHD maps current-node representations into a relatively shared latent region, which may provide a stable reference for evaluating subsequent decisions. Across the Traveling Salesman Problem and the Capacitated Vehicle Routing Problem, these results reveal distinct decision-making patterns across these architecturally distinct solvers and provide a foundation for more interpretable analyses of NCO solvers. Code and additional visualizations are provided in the https://github.com/NCO-Interpretability/NCO-Interpretability.

Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 22 of its 37 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 28 Sep 2026.

Builds on

22 of 37 references.

References · 22

  1. 2017Attention Is All You Needcited by 59,932
  2. 2022Locating and Editing Factual Associations in GPTcited by 2,609
  3. 2016Understanding intermediate layers using linear classifier probescited by 1,279
  4. 2023Inference-Time Intervention: Eliciting Truthful Answers from a Language Modelcited by 1,259
  5. 2022Interpretability in the Wild: a Circuit for Indirect Object Identification in GPT-2 smallcited by 1,130
  6. 2023Steering Llama 2 via Contrastive Activation Additioncited by 1,009
  7. 2021Probing Classifiers: Promises, Shortcomings, and Advancescited by 831
  8. 2018Attention, Learn to Solve Routing Problems!cited by 646
  9. 2022Emergent World Representations: Exploring a Sequence Model Trained on a Synthetic Taskcited by 417
  10. 2020POMO: Policy Optimization with Multiple Optima for Reinforcement Learningcited by 341
  11. 2023Towards Best Practices of Activation Patching in Language Models: Metrics and Methodscited by 328
  12. 2023Emergent Linear Representations in World Models of Self-Supervised Sequence Modelscited by 313
10 more
  1. 2023Causal Abstraction: A Theoretical Foundation for Mechanistic Interpretabilitycited by 194
  2. 2024How to use and interpret activation patchingcited by 191
  3. 2023Neural Combinatorial Optimization with Heavy Decoder: Toward Large Scale Generalizationcited by 140
  4. 2022Learning Generalizable Models for Vehicle Routing Problems via Knowledge Distillationcited by 61
  5. 2025Rethinking Light Decoder-based Solvers for Vehicle Routing Problemscited by 36
  6. 2024Evidence of Learned Look-Ahead in a Chess-Playing Neural Networkcited by 33
  7. 2024Planning in a recurrent neural network that plays Sokobancited by 17
  8. 2025Learning to Insert for Constructive Neural Vehicle Routing Solvercited by 10
  9. 2025Path Channels and Plan Extension Kernels: a Mechanistic Description of Planning in a Sokoban RNNcited by 4
  10. 2025Mechanistic Interpretability for Neural TSP Solverscited by 2

Built on by

Not cited yet.