Skip to content
AI News HubLIVE
Original source2 min read

Rethinking Structured Generation: Can Graph-Based Reasoning Resolve Ambiguity?

Summary

The paper reframes structured generation as an ambiguity-aware inference problem, arguing that natural language often admits multiple structurally distinct but valid interpretations. Instead of single-reference supervision, it uses a multi-valid learning framework and represents candidate outputs as graphs, selecting among them through semantic alignment and relational consistency. Experiments report gains in accuracy, stability, and robustness, and the work was accepted at NeurIPS 2026.

SourcearXiv Computational LinguisticsAuthor: Ratun Rahman, Atit Pokharel
Rethinking Structured Generation: Can Graph-Based Reasoning Resolve Ambiguity?
Report an error

The correction channel is not available yet. You can copy the article reference below for later.

Correction instructions
Read article

[Submitted on 2 Oct 2026]

Title:Rethinking Structured Generation: Can Graph-Based Reasoning Resolve Ambiguity?

View a PDF of the paper titled Rethinking Structured Generation: Can Graph-Based Reasoning Resolve Ambiguity?, by Ratun Rahman and Atit Pokharel

View PDF HTML (experimental)

Abstract:Structured generation is typically formulated as a deterministic mapping from input to a single structured output. This assumption is fundamentally misaligned with natural language, which often admits multiple structurally distinct yet semantically valid interpretations. As a result, existing methods rely on single-reference supervision that collapses ambiguity into one prediction, leading to unstable and inconsistent outputs under underspecified inputs. We reformulate structured generation as an \textit{ambiguity-aware inference problem}, where the objective is to reason over a set of plausible structured outputs rather than predict a single solution. We show that standard training inherently suppresses valid alternatives, and instead adopt a multi-valid learning framework that preserves ambiguity during optimization. To operationalize this formulation, we construct a candidate space of structured outputs, represent each candidate as a graph capturing entities and their relationships, and perform selection via graph-based reasoning over semantic alignment and relational consistency. This enables principled comparison across competing interpretations beyond token-level likelihoods. Experiments on structured generation benchmarks demonstrate consistent improvements in accuracy, stability, and robustness under varying levels of ambiguity. These results highlight the importance of modeling ambiguity explicitly and suggest a shift from single-output prediction to set-level reasoning in structured generation.

Comments: Accepted as NeurIPS 2026

Subjects:

Computation and Language (cs.CL); Artificial Intelligence (cs.AI)

Cite as: arXiv:2610.31681 [cs.CL]

(or arXiv:2610.31681v1 [cs.CL] for this version)

https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2610.31681

arXiv-issued DOI via DataCite

Submission history

From: Ratun Rahman [view email] [v1] Fri, 2 Oct 2026 21:38:11 UTC (275 KB)

Full-text links:

Access Paper:

View a PDF of the paper titled Rethinking Structured Generation: Can Graph-Based Reasoning Resolve Ambiguity?, by Ratun Rahman and Atit Pokharel

View PDF

HTML (experimental)

TeX Source

view license

Additional Features

Audio Summary

Current browse context:

cs.CL

new | recent | 2026-10

Change to browse by:

cs cs.AI

References & Citations

SciX

Google Scholar

Semantic Scholar

Loading...

Data provided by:

Bibliographic Tools

Bibliographic and Citation Tools

Bibliographic Explorer Toggle

Bibliographic Explorer (What is the Explorer?)

Connected Papers Toggle

Connected Papers (What is Connected Papers?)

Litmaps Toggle

Litmaps (What is Litmaps?)

scite.ai Toggle

scite Smart Citations (What are Smart Citations?)

Code, Data, Media

Code, Data and Media Associated with this Article

alphaXiv Toggle

alphaXiv (What is alphaXiv?)

Links to Code Toggle

CatalyzeX Code Finder for Papers (What is CatalyzeX?)

DagsHub Toggle

DagsHub (What is DagsHub?)

GotitPub Toggle

Gotit.pub (What is GotitPub?)

Huggingface Toggle

Hugging Face (What is Huggingface?)

ScienceCast Toggle

ScienceCast (What is ScienceCast?)

Demos

Demos

Replicate Toggle

Replicate (What is Replicate?)

Spaces Toggle

Hugging Face Spaces (What is Spaces?)

Spaces Toggle

TXYZ.AI (What is TXYZ.AI?)

Related Papers

Recommenders and Search Tools

Link to Influence Flower

Influence Flower (What are Influence Flowers?)

Core recommender toggle

CORE Recommender (What is CORE?)

Author

Venue

Institution

Topic

About arXivLabs

arXivLabs: experimental projects with community collaborators

arXivLabs is a framework that allows collaborators to develop and share new arXiv features directly on our website.

Both individuals and organizations that work with arXivLabs have embraced and accepted our values of openness, community, excellence, and user data privacy. arXiv is committed to these values and only works with partners that adhere to them.

Have an idea for a project that will add value for arXiv's community? Learn more about arXivLabs.

Which authors of this paper are endorsers? | Disable MathJax (What is MathJax?)

Key points and analysis

Article intelligence

ResearchersAdvanced

Key points

  • Reframes structured generation as ambiguity-aware inference over a set of plausible outputs
  • Argues standard training suppresses valid alternatives and proposes multi-valid learning
  • Represents candidates as graphs and selects via semantic alignment and relational consistency
  • Reports improved accuracy, stability, and robustness on structured generation benchmarks

Highlights and analysis are generated automatically and may contain errors. Check the original source.