LLM-based automated heuristic design (AHD) typically scores executable programs on complete instances or within fixed solver components. In large-scale routing problems, localized reconstruction reduces the size of each optimization task, but repair regions within the same incumbent can exhibit substantially different structures. One construction rule must therefore compromise across them. In this paper, we propose SpecAHD, a coupled bilevel framework for within-instance specialization. An upper-level search learns where to expose bounded repair regions, while a lower-level search evolves a complementary repertoire of executable heuristics for the induced repair tasks. The upper-level program determines the repair tasks seen by the lower level, while checked repair outcomes determine how upper-level programs are evaluated. The lower-level objective favors heuristics that perform well on average or solve tasks that the current repertoire handles poorly. For the repair tasks induced by a fixed upper-level program and a fixed lower-level candidate pool, this objective is monotone submodular, allowing greedy repertoire selection with a (1-1/e) approximation guarantee. Across four routing problems and multiple LLM backbones, SpecAHD reduces held-out objective cost by up to 57.7% against the strongest competing AHD baseline and outperforms the per-instance baseline envelope on most public instances.
Carlos S. Sepúlveda, Gonzalo A. Ruzcs.LG cs.AI cs.RO math.OC
Neural combinatorial optimization (NCO) trains autoregressive policies to solve routing problems. The standard training algorithm, REINFORCE with a rollout baseline, requires maintaining and periodically updating a frozen copy of the policy for variance reduction. This baseline introduces a structural vulnerability: on harder instances, a poor baseline produces noisy gradient estimates that can destabilize training. We evaluate Group Relative Policy Optimization (GRPO), an algorithm from large language model alignment that eliminates the baseline entirely by normalizing advantages within groups of sampled trajectories. In a controlled comparison of five RL algorithms on TSP and CVRP benchmarks within the RL4CO framework, we find that: (i) GRPO avoids the training collapse observed with REINFORCE on TSP-100, where performance degrades from cost 9.8 to 52.1 immediately after the warmup phase and does not recover under extended training; (ii) at matched gradient updates, GRPO achieves solution quality within 2% of POMO, a strong AM-based multi-start baseline, while requiring no external baseline; and (iii) P3O, a pairwise preference algorithm also from the alignment literature, is competitive on TSP but shows higher variability on CVRP. These results identify GRPO as a promising baseline-free alternative for NCO, particularly in settings where baseline-dependent training becomes fragile.