How Good Is Neural Combinatorial Optimization?

Traditional solvers for tackling combinatorial optimization (CO) problems are usually designed by human experts. Recently, there has been a surge of interest in utilizing Deep Learning, especially Deep Reinforcement Learning, to automatically learn effective solvers for CO. The resultant new paradigm is termed Neural Combinatorial Optimization (NCO). However, the advantages and disadvantages of NCO over other approaches have not been well studied empirically or theoretically. In this work, we present a comprehensive comparative study of NCO solvers and alternative solvers. Specifically, taking the Traveling Salesman Problem as the testbed problem, we assess the performance of the solvers in terms of five aspects, i.e., effectiveness, efficiency, stability, scalability and generalization ability. Our results show that in general the solvers learned by NCO approaches still fall short of traditional solvers in nearly all these aspects. A potential benefit of the former would be their superior time and energy efficiency on small-size problem instances when sufficient training instances are available. We hope this work would help better understand the strengths and weakness of NCO, and provide a comprehensive evaluation protocol for further benchmarking NCO approaches against other approaches.