Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 cited by

GraphFramEx: Towards Systematic Evaluation of Explainability Methods for Graph Neural Networks

Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.

SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event

T0 review · schema-true

One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.

pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp

arxiv 2206.09677 v5 pith:WJ2OJVP7 submitted 2022-06-20 cs.LG cs.AI

classification cs.LGcs.AI
keywords evaluationexplainabilitybestgnnsgraphmethodsmodelsinadequate
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal
0 comments
read the original abstract

As one of the most popular machine learning models today, graph neural networks (GNNs) have attracted intense interest recently, and so does their explainability. Users are increasingly interested in a better understanding of GNN models and their outcomes. Unfortunately, today's evaluation frameworks for GNN explainability often rely on few inadequate synthetic datasets, leading to conclusions of limited scope due to a lack of complexity in the problem instances. As GNN models are deployed to more mission-critical applications, we are in dire need for a common evaluation protocol of explainability methods of GNNs. In this paper, we propose, to our best knowledge, the first systematic evaluation framework for GNN explainability, considering explainability on three different "user needs". We propose a unique metric that combines the fidelity measures and classifies explanations based on their quality of being sufficient or necessary. We scope ourselves to node classification tasks and compare the most representative techniques in the field of input-level explainability for GNNs. For the inadequate but widely used synthetic benchmarks, surprisingly shallow techniques such as personalized PageRank have the best performance for a minimum computation time. But when the graph structure is more complex and nodes have meaningful features, gradient-based methods are the best according to our evaluation criteria. However, none dominates the others on all evaluation dimensions and there is always a trade-off. We further apply our evaluation protocol in a case study for frauds explanation on eBay transaction graphs to reflect the production environment.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 4 Pith papers

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. A Polynomial Architecture-Attribution Co-Design Framework for Exact Aumann-Shapley Attribution in GNNs

    cs.LG 2026-07 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    By constraining a GIN-style GNN to polynomial operations, APEX derives a degree bound and uses Gauss–Legendre quadrature to compute exact Aumann–Shapley feature and node attributions with 2^{L-1} evaluations.

  2. Ask Only When Needed: Proactive Retrieval from Memory and Skills for Experience-Driven Lifelong Agents

    cs.CL 2026-04 unverdicted novelty 6.0 of 10

    ProactAgent treats memory retrieval as a learned policy action and reports large gains in success rate and fewer interaction rounds on SciWorld, AlfWorld, and StuLife.

  3. RAW-Explainer: Post-hoc Explanations of Graph Neural Networks on Knowledge Graphs

    cs.LG 2025-06 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    RAW-Explainer combines parameterized edge-mask learning with random-walk connectivity and a distance-biased robust evaluator to efficiently produce connected subgraph explanations for knowledge-graph link prediction.

  4. Ignoring Directionality Leads to Compromised Graph Neural Network Explanations

    cs.LG 2025-06 conditional novelty 3.0 of 10

    Preserving edge directionality in GNN preprocessing can substantially improve post-hoc explanation quality compared to symmetrization.

Pith tools