On the Universality and Complexity of GNN for Solving Second-order Cone Programs
Ruizhe Li, Enming Liang, Minghua Chen
Abstract
Graph Neural Networks (GNNs) have demonstrated both empirical efficiency and universal expressivity for solving constrained optimization problems such as linear and quadratic programming. However, extending this paradigm to more general convex problems with universality guarantees, particularly Second-Order Cone Programs (SOCPs), remains largely unexplored. We address this challenge by proposing a novel graph representation that captures the inherent structure of conic constraints. We then establish a key universality theorem: there exist GNNs that can provably approximate essential SOCP properties, including instance feasibility and optimal solutions. We further derive the sample complexity for GNN generalization based on Rademacher complexity, filling an important gap for Weisfeiler-Lehman-based GNNs in learning-to-optimize paradigms. Our results provide a rigorous foundation linking GNN expressivity and generalization power to conic optimization structure, opening new avenues for scalable, data-driven SOCP solvers. The approach extends naturally to -order cone programming for any while preserving universal expressivity and requiring no structural modifications to the GNN architecture. Numerical experiments on randomly generated SOCPs and real-world power grid problems demonstrate the effectiveness of our approach, achieving superior prediction accuracy with significantly fewer parameters than fully connected neural networks.
Ask about this paper
Your agent reads all of it.
Lune indexed this paper to the last equation, along with the top-tier papers that cite it. Ask a question and the answer quotes them.
Your agent calls
Luneget_paper_fulltext
Free to start. No credit card required.
Terminal
Install the CLIlune papers fulltext 80bed7b2-d7b7-41f0-87a3-75fb8266bc9dCited by top-tier papers1
Ask how each one uses itBuilds on27
- Generalization and Representational Limits of Graph Neural NetworksVikas K. Garg, Stefanie Jegelka, Tommi S. JaakkolaICML 2020 · 363 citations
- A PAC-Bayesian Approach to Generalization Bounds for Graph Neural NetworksRenjie Liao, Raquel Urtasun, Richard S. ZemelICLR 2021 · 109 citations
- WL meet VCChristopher Morris, Floris Geerts, Jan Tönshoff, Martin GroheICML 2023 · 36 citations
- On the Stability of Expressive Positional Encodings for GraphsYinan Huang, William Lu, Joshua Robinson, Yu Yang et al.ICLR 2024 · 32 citations
- Are Graph Neural Networks Optimal Approximation Algorithms?Morris Yau, Nikolaos Karalias, Eric Lu, Jessica Xu et al.NeurIPS 2024 · 23 citations
Related papers
- On the Expressive Power of GNNs to Solve Linear SDPsChendi Qian, Christopher MorrisICML 2026 · 1 citation
- Expressive Power of Graph Neural Networks for (Mixed-Integer) Quadratic ProgramsZiang Chen, Xiaohan Chen, Jialin Liu, Xinshang Wang et al.ICML 2025
- Rethinking the Capacity of Graph Neural Networks for Branching StrategyZiang Chen, Jialin Liu, Xiaohan Chen, Xinshang Wang et al.NeurIPS 2024 · 17 citations
- On Representing Linear Programs by Graph Neural NetworksZiang Chen, Jialin Liu, Xinshang Wang, Wotao YinICLR 2023 · 9 citations
- Towards Explaining the Power of Constant-depth Graph Neural Networks for Structured Linear ProgrammingQian Li, Minghui Ouyang, Tian Ding, Yuyi Wang et al.ICLR 2025
