A natural way to compare two graphs is to align their vertex sets by a bijection and to measure the difference of the aligned adjacency matrices in a matrix norm. Depending on the norm, this yields, for example, the edit distance, the cut distance, the spectral distance, and the local edit distance. To make these distances applicable to graphs of different order, one can consider blowups of the graphs or, equivalently, relax bijections to fractional alignments, that is, optimal transport plans between the uniform distributions on the vertex sets, in the spirit of Gromov-Wasserstein distances. We investigate how much the optimal transport versions can differ from their bijective counterparts, that is, we quantify their integrality gaps. For the edit distance, we improve the best known upper bound on the integrality gap from 3 to 2 and the lower bound from 6/5 to 4/3. For the cut distance, we approach Lovász's conjecture that $δ_\square \le 2δ_\square^{\rm OT}$ from both sides. We improve the previously best known upper bound $δ_\square \le 32 \cdot (δ_\square^{\rm OT})^{1/67}$ (Borgs, Chayes, Lovász, Sós and Vesztergombi, Adv. Math. 2008) to $δ_\square \le C_\varepsilon \cdot (δ_\square^{\rm OT})^{1-\varepsilon}$ for every $\varepsilon > 0$, and we construct graphs $G,H$ with $δ_\square(G,H) = 2δ_\square^{\rm OT}(G,H)$, establishing a factor-2 lower bound that matches Lovász's conjecture. For the local edit and spectral distances, we obtain upper bounds of order $\sqrt{t\ln(1/t)}$ and $\sqrt{t}$, respectively, where $t$ is the corresponding optimal transport distance, and we show that, unlike for the edit and cut distances, no linear upper bounds are possible. Finally, we show that computing the optimal transport distances is NP-hard, and we give hardness of approximation results for the cut, spectral, and local edit distances.
Multimodal agents commonly generate free-form reasoning before each action. For small models, limited model capacity can result in lengthy reasoning that provides little useful guidance for action generation while incurring substantial inference cost. To address this challenge, we introduce Selection-based Structured Reasoning (SSR), a framework that reformulates reasoning as selection instead of open-ended generation. SSR represents recurring high-level reasoning as pre-specified, reusable natural-language candidates. At each turn, the model selects from these reasoning candidates based on their likelihoods given the current context, without requiring an auxiliary task head. Using pre-specified reasoning traces enables parallel scoring, where teacher-forced prefilling computes token likelihoods concurrently within and across candidates using a shared context KV cache. We evaluate SSR on seven multimodal search benchmarks using 2B and 4B models. Across multiple reinforcement learning objectives and supervised fine-tuning, SSR delivers significant efficiency gains without sacrificing task performance. SSR achieves an average success rate competitive with leading search agents of the same scale, while reducing per-turn reasoning latency by over 90% and total per-question model inference latency by 28-54%. Project page: https://zfy0314.github.io/ssr-webpage/.