Measuring What Matters: A Unified Evaluation Framework for GNN Explainability

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2607.04600v1
• Date: Mon, 06 Jul 2026 02:03:39 GMT
• Title: Measuring What Matters: A Unified Evaluation Framework for GNN Explainability
• Abstract summary: Graph eXplainable AI (G-XAI) is increasingly important for making Graph Neural Networks interpretable and accountable.<n>We introduce a unified, quantitative benchmarking framework for G-XAI that requires no ground-truth assumptions.<n>We distill our findings into actionable G-XAI usability guidelines to support Machine Learning practitioners in evaluating and deploying trustworthy GNN-based pipelines.
• Score: 5.478527138043119
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: Graph eXplainable AI (G-XAI) is increasingly important for making Graph Neural Networks interpretable and accountable. While a growing number of explainers are available, choosing the right method and assessing the trustworthiness of its outputs remains unclear. Consistent evaluation practices and actionable guidance are still missing, hindering practical adoption. In this paper, we introduce a unified, quantitative benchmarking framework for G-XAI that requires no ground-truth assumptions. We formalize tabular explainability metrics for graph data, evaluating topological structure and node features as independent components. Our large-scale benchmarking study identifies explainers that consistently lie on the Pareto front across metric pairs and tasks, establishing robustly non-dominated solutions - while confirming that no single explainer achieves universal superiority. We distill our findings into actionable G-XAI usability guidelines to support Machine Learning practitioners in evaluating and deploying trustworthy GNN-based pipelines.

Related papers

• VeriGraph: Towards Verifiable Data-Analytic Agents [71.17693022916896]
  LLM-based agents have demonstrated strong capabilities in data-intensive analytical tasks, yet their outputs are rarely verifiable.<n>We propose VeriGraph, a traceable neuro-symbolic reasoning framework that enables agents to construct an explicit heterogeneous evidence directed acyclic graph.<n>Our results suggest that explicit evidence-graph construction is a promising path toward verifiable data-analytic agents.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-06-15T11:50:56Z)
• GNNs for Time Series Anomaly Detection: An Open-Source Framework and a Critical Evaluation [0.0]
  We present an open-source framework for graph-based Time Series Anomaly Detection (TSAD) using Graph Neural Networks (GNNs)<n>This work contributes both practical tools and critical insights to advance the development and evaluation of graph-based TSAD systems.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-03-10T13:45:34Z)
• Enrich-on-Graph: Query-Graph Alignment for Complex Reasoning with LLM Enriching [61.824094419641575]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) struggle with hallucinations and factual errors in knowledge-intensive scenarios like knowledge graph question answering (KGQA)<n>We attribute this to the semantic gap between structured knowledge graphs (KGs) and unstructured queries, caused by inherent differences in their focuses and structures.<n>Existing methods usually employ resource-intensive, non-scalable reasoning on vanilla KGs, but overlook this gap.<n>We propose a flexible framework, Enrich-on-Graph (EoG), which leverages LLMs' prior knowledge to enrich KGs, bridge the semantic gap between graphs and queries.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-09-25T06:48:52Z)
• A method for the systematic generation of graph XAI benchmarks via Weisfeiler-Leman coloring [4.187844916497259]
  Graph neural networks have become the de facto model for learning from structured data.<n>Several explainable AI techniques for graphs have been developed to address this major issue.<n>Current graph-XAI benchmarks are limited to simplistic synthetic datasets or a few real-world tasks curated by domain experts.<n>We propose a method to automate the construction of graph XAI benchmarks from generic graph classification datasets.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-05-18T14:19:52Z)
• xAI-Drop: Don't Use What You Cannot Explain [23.33477769275026]
  Graph Neural Networks (GNNs) have emerged as the predominant paradigm for learning from graph-structured data. GNNs face challenges such as lack of generalization and poor interpretability. We introduce xAI-Drop, a novel topological-level dropping regularizer.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-07-29T14:53:45Z)
• Uncertainty in Graph Neural Networks: A Survey [47.785948021510535]
  Graph Neural Networks (GNNs) have been extensively used in various real-world applications.<n>However, the predictive uncertainty of GNNs stemming from diverse sources can lead to unstable and erroneous predictions.<n>This survey aims to provide a comprehensive overview of the GNNs from the perspective of uncertainty.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-03-11T21:54:52Z)
• On Discprecncies between Perturbation Evaluations of Graph Neural Network Attributions [49.8110352174327]
  We assess attribution methods from a perspective not previously explored in the graph domain: retraining. The core idea is to retrain the network on important (or not important) relationships as identified by the attributions. We run our analysis on four state-of-the-art GNN attribution methods and five synthetic and real-world graph classification datasets.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-01-01T02:03:35Z)
• Towards Robust Fidelity for Evaluating Explainability of Graph Neural Networks [32.345435955298825]
  Graph Neural Networks (GNNs) are neural models that leverage the dependency structure in graphical data via message passing among the graph nodes. A main challenge in studying GNN explainability is to provide fidelity measures that evaluate the performance of these explanation functions. This paper studies this foundational challenge, spotlighting the inherent limitations of prevailing fidelity metrics.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-10-03T06:25:14Z)
• Goodhart's Law Applies to NLP's Explanation Benchmarks [57.26445915212884]
  We critically examine two sets of metrics: the ERASER metrics (comprehensiveness and sufficiency) and the EVAL-X metrics. We show that we can inflate a model's comprehensiveness and sufficiency scores dramatically without altering its predictions or explanations on in-distribution test inputs. Our results raise doubts about the ability of current metrics to guide explainability research, underscoring the need for a broader reassessment of what precisely these metrics are intended to capture.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-08-28T03:03:03Z)
• DEGREE: Decomposition Based Explanation For Graph Neural Networks [55.38873296761104]
  We propose DEGREE to provide a faithful explanation for GNN predictions. By decomposing the information generation and aggregation mechanism of GNNs, DEGREE allows tracking the contributions of specific components of the input graph to the final prediction. We also design a subgraph level interpretation algorithm to reveal complex interactions between graph nodes that are overlooked by previous methods.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-05-22T10:29:52Z)
• ROSCOE: A Suite of Metrics for Scoring Step-by-Step Reasoning [63.77667876176978]
  Large language models show improved downstream task interpretability when prompted to generate step-by-step reasoning to justify their final answers. These reasoning steps greatly improve model interpretability and verification, but objectively studying their correctness is difficult. We present ROS, a suite of interpretable, unsupervised automatic scores that improve and extend previous text generation evaluation metrics.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-12-15T15:52:39Z)
• GraphFramEx: Towards Systematic Evaluation of Explainability Methods for Graph Neural Networks [15.648750523827616]
  We propose the first systematic evaluation framework for GNN explainability, considering explainability on three different "user needs" 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.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-06-20T09:33:12Z)

This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.

This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.