Explaining the Explainers in Graph Neural Networks: a Comparative Study

Overview

• Graph Neural Networks (GNNs) have seen rapid adoption in many fields, leading to the need for methods to understand their decision-making process.
• GNN explainers have emerged to address this, with various novel and adapted techniques.
• Previous studies have benchmarked explainer performance, but haven't provided insights into why certain GNN architectures are more or less explainable.
• This survey aims to fill these gaps through a systematic experimental study.

Plain English Explanation

Graph Neural Networks (GNNs) are a type of machine learning model that can analyze and learn from data represented as graphs, which are a way of modeling relationships between different entities. GNNs have become very popular and are used in many different fields, from science to engineering.

As GNNs become more widely used, it's important to understand how they make their decisions. This is where GNN explainers come in - they are techniques that try to explain the reasoning behind a GNN's predictions. There are many different GNN explainers, some completely new and some adapted from other types of machine learning models.

Previous studies have compared the performance of these different explainers, but they haven't really looked at why some GNN architectures (the specific design of the GNN model) are more or less explainable than others. This survey aims to fill that gap by doing a thorough experiment to understand the relationship between GNN architectures and the effectiveness of different explainers.

Technical Explanation

This survey conducts a systematic experimental study to test ten different GNN explainers on eight representative GNN architectures, using six carefully designed graph and node classification datasets. The goal is to provide insights into the choice and applicability of GNN explainers, identify key components that make them usable and successful, and offer recommendations to avoid common interpretation pitfalls.

The researchers tested a wide range of GNN explainers, including both novel methods and adaptations from other domains, such as GNNExplainer, GraphFrameX, and L2X-GNN. They evaluated the explainers on several datasets that covered different graph and node classification tasks, ensuring a diverse set of scenarios.

The results of this extensive experiment provide key insights:

• They identify which GNN architectures are more or less explainable and why
• They isolate the critical components that make GNN explainers usable and successful
• They offer recommendations to avoid common pitfalls when interpreting GNN explanations

Critical Analysis

The researchers acknowledge several caveats and limitations in their work. They note that their study focuses on a limited set of GNN architectures and explainer methods, and that the performance of explainers can be sensitive to hyperparameter tuning. Additionally, they highlight the need for further research into the robustness and generalizability of GNN explainers, as well as the potential for adversarial attacks to undermine their reliability.

While the survey provides valuable insights, one could argue that the experimental setup, with its focus on specific datasets and architectures, may not fully capture the diversity of real-world GNN applications. There could also be a need for more user-based evaluations to understand the practical usability and interpretability of the different explainer methods.

Overall, this survey represents an important step in understanding the relationship between GNN architectures and explainability, but further research is needed to fully address the challenges of interpreting the decision-making of these powerful machine learning models.

Conclusion

This survey provides a comprehensive and systematic evaluation of GNN explainers, offering key insights into the choice and applicability of these methods. By testing a range of explainers on diverse GNN architectures and datasets, the researchers have isolated critical components that contribute to the usability and success of GNN interpretability approaches. Their recommendations can help practitioners avoid common pitfalls and improve the transparency of GNN-based systems.

As GNNs continue to gain traction in various domains, the importance of developing robust and reliable explainability methods will only increase. The insights and directions for future research highlighted in this survey are a valuable contribution to the ongoing efforts to make GNNs more interpretable and accountable.