@inproceedings{liao-etal-2026-differentiable,
title = "Differentiable Geometric Alignment for {LLM} Spatial Reasoning: Training-Time Symbolic Constraints, Solver-Free Inference",
author = "Liao, Yuhao and
Zeng, Zijian and
Yang, Huiming and
Dingding",
editor = "Lee, Hung-Yi and
Dev, Sunipa and
Li, Jessy and
Elliott, Desmond",
booktitle = "Proceedings of the 2026 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing",
month = oct,
year = "2026",
address = "Budapest, Hungary",
publisher = "Association for Computational Linguistics",
url = "https://aclanthology.org/2026.emnlp-main.2195/",
pages = "49905--49928",
ISBN = "979-8-89176-459-0",
abstract = "Large language models struggle with spatial and geometric reasoning. Existing remedies either fine-tune on answers, leaving geometric structure implicit, or attach a symbolic solver at inference, which is brittle under imperfect parser coverage. We propose **DGCL** (*Differentiable Geometric Constraint Layer*), a training-time objective for a typed family of spatial and geometric relations (e.g., parallelism, frame-relative left/right, vertical order) that supervises the LLM{'}s hidden states with a differentiable Huber residual over parser-proposed candidate constraints, a coverage regularizer, and a learned selector. Training requires a frozen constraint parser; inference does not: it is a single LLM forward pass over the text prompt plus one learned `[GEO]{`} token, with no parser, solver, external tool, or auxiliary head. We evaluate on three auditable datasets (planar geometry, language-grounded 3D relations, and a firewalled zero-touch counterfactual split) with $10{,}278$ test instances over 5 seeds. We are explicit about attribution: a strong constraint-supervised control (A2c), which trains the selector and coverage objective on gold candidates but blocks the residual gradient from the LLM, already captures most of the improvement over plain fine-tuning (up to $+26$ points). Our isolated contribution is that *coupling* the differentiable residual gradient into the LLM adds a *further, stable* $+4.0$ to $+5.2$ points over this strong control across all five settings (seven pre-registered gates, Holm-corrected $p{<}0.001$), at $1.06\times$ a fine-tuned baseline{'}s latency. On full parser coverage a strong tool baseline marginally exceeds DGCL; DGCL{'}s advantage is robustness under partial or missing coverage, not superiority over oracle solvers."
}<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<modsCollection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/mods/v3">
<mods ID="liao-etal-2026-differentiable">
<titleInfo>
<title>Differentiable Geometric Alignment for LLM Spatial Reasoning: Training-Time Symbolic Constraints, Solver-Free Inference</title>
</titleInfo>
<name type="personal">
<namePart type="given">Yuhao</namePart>
<namePart type="family">Liao</namePart>
<role>
<roleTerm authority="marcrelator" type="text">author</roleTerm>
</role>
</name>
<name type="personal">
<namePart type="given">Zijian</namePart>
<namePart type="family">Zeng</namePart>
<role>
<roleTerm authority="marcrelator" type="text">author</roleTerm>
</role>
</name>
<name type="personal">
<namePart type="given">Huiming</namePart>
<namePart type="family">Yang</namePart>
<role>
<roleTerm authority="marcrelator" type="text">author</roleTerm>
</role>
</name>
<name>
<namePart>Dingding</namePart>
<role>
<roleTerm authority="marcrelator" type="text">author</roleTerm>
</role>
</name>
<originInfo>
<dateIssued>2026-10</dateIssued>
</originInfo>
<typeOfResource>text</typeOfResource>
<relatedItem type="host">
<titleInfo>
<title>Proceedings of the 2026 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing</title>
</titleInfo>
<name type="personal">
<namePart type="given">Hung-Yi</namePart>
<namePart type="family">Lee</namePart>
<role>
<roleTerm authority="marcrelator" type="text">editor</roleTerm>
</role>
</name>
<name type="personal">
<namePart type="given">Sunipa</namePart>
<namePart type="family">Dev</namePart>
<role>
<roleTerm authority="marcrelator" type="text">editor</roleTerm>
</role>
</name>
<name type="personal">
<namePart type="given">Jessy</namePart>
<namePart type="family">Li</namePart>
<role>
<roleTerm authority="marcrelator" type="text">editor</roleTerm>
</role>
</name>
<name type="personal">
<namePart type="given">Desmond</namePart>
<namePart type="family">Elliott</namePart>
<role>
<roleTerm authority="marcrelator" type="text">editor</roleTerm>
</role>
</name>
<originInfo>
<publisher>Association for Computational Linguistics</publisher>
<place>
<placeTerm type="text">Budapest, Hungary</placeTerm>
</place>
</originInfo>
<genre authority="marcgt">conference publication</genre>
<identifier type="isbn">979-8-89176-459-0</identifier>
</relatedItem>
<abstract>Large language models struggle with spatial and geometric reasoning. Existing remedies either fine-tune on answers, leaving geometric structure implicit, or attach a symbolic solver at inference, which is brittle under imperfect parser coverage. We propose **DGCL** (*Differentiable Geometric Constraint Layer*), a training-time objective for a typed family of spatial and geometric relations (e.g., parallelism, frame-relative left/right, vertical order) that supervises the LLM’s hidden states with a differentiable Huber residual over parser-proposed candidate constraints, a coverage regularizer, and a learned selector. Training requires a frozen constraint parser; inference does not: it is a single LLM forward pass over the text prompt plus one learned ‘[GEO]‘ token, with no parser, solver, external tool, or auxiliary head. We evaluate on three auditable datasets (planar geometry, language-grounded 3D relations, and a firewalled zero-touch counterfactual split) with 10,278 test instances over 5 seeds. We are explicit about attribution: a strong constraint-supervised control (A2c), which trains the selector and coverage objective on gold candidates but blocks the residual gradient from the LLM, already captures most of the improvement over plain fine-tuning (up to +26 points). Our isolated contribution is that *coupling* the differentiable residual gradient into the LLM adds a *further, stable* +4.0 to +5.2 points over this strong control across all five settings (seven pre-registered gates, Holm-corrected p<0.001), at 1.06\times a fine-tuned baseline’s latency. On full parser coverage a strong tool baseline marginally exceeds DGCL; DGCL’s advantage is robustness under partial or missing coverage, not superiority over oracle solvers.</abstract>
<identifier type="citekey">liao-etal-2026-differentiable</identifier>
<location>
<url>https://aclanthology.org/2026.emnlp-main.2195/</url>
</location>
<part>
<date>2026-10</date>
<extent unit="page">
<start>49905</start>
<end>49928</end>
</extent>
</part>
</mods>
</modsCollection>
%0 Conference Proceedings
%T Differentiable Geometric Alignment for LLM Spatial Reasoning: Training-Time Symbolic Constraints, Solver-Free Inference
%A Liao, Yuhao
%A Zeng, Zijian
%A Yang, Huiming
%Y Lee, Hung-Yi
%Y Dev, Sunipa
%Y Li, Jessy
%Y Elliott, Desmond
%A Dingding
%S Proceedings of the 2026 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing
%D 2026
%8 October
%I Association for Computational Linguistics
%C Budapest, Hungary
%@ 979-8-89176-459-0
%F liao-etal-2026-differentiable
%X Large language models struggle with spatial and geometric reasoning. Existing remedies either fine-tune on answers, leaving geometric structure implicit, or attach a symbolic solver at inference, which is brittle under imperfect parser coverage. We propose **DGCL** (*Differentiable Geometric Constraint Layer*), a training-time objective for a typed family of spatial and geometric relations (e.g., parallelism, frame-relative left/right, vertical order) that supervises the LLM’s hidden states with a differentiable Huber residual over parser-proposed candidate constraints, a coverage regularizer, and a learned selector. Training requires a frozen constraint parser; inference does not: it is a single LLM forward pass over the text prompt plus one learned ‘[GEO]‘ token, with no parser, solver, external tool, or auxiliary head. We evaluate on three auditable datasets (planar geometry, language-grounded 3D relations, and a firewalled zero-touch counterfactual split) with 10,278 test instances over 5 seeds. We are explicit about attribution: a strong constraint-supervised control (A2c), which trains the selector and coverage objective on gold candidates but blocks the residual gradient from the LLM, already captures most of the improvement over plain fine-tuning (up to +26 points). Our isolated contribution is that *coupling* the differentiable residual gradient into the LLM adds a *further, stable* +4.0 to +5.2 points over this strong control across all five settings (seven pre-registered gates, Holm-corrected p<0.001), at 1.06\times a fine-tuned baseline’s latency. On full parser coverage a strong tool baseline marginally exceeds DGCL; DGCL’s advantage is robustness under partial or missing coverage, not superiority over oracle solvers.
%U https://aclanthology.org/2026.emnlp-main.2195/
%P 49905-49928
Markdown (Informal)
[Differentiable Geometric Alignment for LLM Spatial Reasoning: Training-Time Symbolic Constraints, Solver-Free Inference](https://aclanthology.org/2026.emnlp-main.2195/) (Liao et al., EMNLP 2026)
ACL