Beyond Simple Graphs: Neural Multi-Objective Routing on Multigraphs
Filip Rydin, Attila Lischka, Jiaming Wu, Morteza Haghir Chehreghani, Bal\'azs Kulcs\'ar

TL;DR
This paper introduces two neural network-based methods for multi-objective routing on multigraphs, addressing a gap in existing approaches by handling multiple edges with distinct attributes, and demonstrates their effectiveness through extensive empirical evaluation.
Contribution
It presents novel neural routing models specifically designed for multigraphs, including a scalable pruning-based approach, filling a key gap in current routing methodologies.
Findings
Both models outperform traditional heuristics.
The pruning-based model achieves comparable results with higher scalability.
Models are effective across diverse graph types and problem settings.
Abstract
Learning-based methods for routing have gained significant attention in recent years, both in single-objective and multi-objective contexts. Yet, existing methods are unsuitable for routing on multigraphs, which feature multiple edges with distinct attributes between node pairs, despite their strong relevance in real-world scenarios. In this paper, we propose two graph neural network-based methods to address multi-objective routing on multigraphs. Our first approach operates directly on the multigraph by autoregressively selecting edges until a tour is completed. The second model, which is more scalable, first simplifies the multigraph via a learned pruning strategy and then performs autoregressive routing on the resulting simple graph. We evaluate both models empirically, across a wide range of problems and graph distributions, and demonstrate their competitive performance compared to…
Peer Reviews
Decision·ICLR 2026 Poster
1. The paper is well organized and written in a clear manner. 2. The proposed incorporation of edge selection into the decoding process represents a potentially novel contribution to the NCO domain. 3. The inclusion of two complementary models, one prioritizing speed and the other performance, is a reasonable design choice. However, the experimental results do not provide sufficient justification for maintaining both variants.
1. Contribution claims are overstated. The authors state that existing methods rely on transformers and can handle only problems defined on simple graphs, not beyond routing problems in the Euclidean settings. However, there are several works capable of encoding complex graphs, and the authors even cite some of them, although they claim that, to the best of their knowledge, such methods do not exist. Two of the cited works, (Kwon et al., 2021) and (Drakulic et al., 2025), can encode multigraphs
**Strengths:** - The paper focuses on a relatively unexplored setting: multi-graph multi-objective neural routing optimization - The proposed dual-head GMS seems novel - Experiments show clear gains over the baselines
**Weaknesses:** - The paper claims that existing techniques are not suitable for asymmetric and multigraph but this claim is not sufficiently substantiated. While approaches that rely solely on selecting the order of nodes are not sufficient, several recent approaches focus instead on selecting edges instead (for example, DIFUSCO and GREAT, both are cited in the paper). These approaches, at least in principle, can be used on asymmetric/multigraphs, and the paper does not compare to them, or expl
**Originality** - This is the first neural approach to handle multi-objective routing on multigraphs, an important and realistic extension beyond simple graphs. The paper clearly articulates why existing models (e.g., transformer-based TSP solvers) fail in this setting. - The dual-decoder architecture (GMS-DH) is elegant, combining non-autoregressive edge pruning and autoregressive routing / node selection in a unified framework. The preference-conditioned hypernetwork design for multi-objecti
Both proposed variants face notable scalability issues. GMS-DH performs poorly on larger instances with many edges, suggesting that its hierarchical design does not scale effectively. Meanwhile, GMS-EB is computationally impractical for large graphs due to its excessive training and inference time, scaling poorly with the number of edges. Notably, the paper lacks a discussion or outlook on these scalability limitations and provides no guidance or future directions for addressing them.
Videos
No videos yet. Explain this paper in a talk, walkthrough, or lecture? Add one.
Taxonomy
TopicsNeural Networks and Applications · Industrial Technology and Control Systems
