ICLR 2023

DEGREE: Decomposition Based Explanation for Graph Neural Networks

Qizhang Feng, Ninghao Liu, Fan Yang, Ruixiang Tang, Mengnan Du, Xia Hu

Main figure for DEGREE: Decomposition Based Explanation for Graph Neural Networks

Abstract

Graph Neural Networks (GNNs) are gaining extensive attention for their application in graph data. However, the black-box nature of GNNs prevents users from understanding and trusting the models, thus hampering their applicability. Whereas explaining GNNs remains a challenge, most existing methods fall into approximation based and perturbation based approaches with suffer from faithfulness problems and unnatural artifacts, respectively. To tackle these problems, we propose DEGREE (ecomposition based xplanation for aph n ural n tworks) 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. Based on this, we further design a subgraph level interpretation algorithm to reveal complex interactions between graph nodes that are overlooked by previous methods. The efficiency of our algorithm can be further improved by utilizing GNN characteristics. Finally, we conduct quantitative and qualitative experiments on synthetic and real-world datasets to demonstrate the effectiveness of DEGREE on node classification and graph classification tasks.

Proposed method: GCN

Benchmark Results

Tested on 1 dataset 1 baseline value reported too low

Tables show presented results in global context (best 3 papers + GCN + MLP).

TU Dortmund

#ModelAccuracy ↑Paper
1
MSH-GNN
0.9910 ±0.0030
2
ID-GNN+BEC
0.9830 ±0.0360
3
SupCosine
0.9830 ±0.0250
39
GIN
0.9330 ±0.0290
63
GCN
actual #63 vs paper #680 617 places worse
0.9220 ±0.0440
best reported
actual #63 vs paper #680 617 places worse
paper 0.7700
paper 0.7700 Δ at pub 0.1210 Δ today 0.1520
183
GAT
actual #183 vs paper #645 462 places worse
0.9010 ±0.0580
best reported
actual #183 vs paper #645 462 places worse
paper 0.7900
paper 0.7900 Δ at pub 0.1110 Δ today 0.1110
403
MLP
0.8660 ±0.0495
SOTA performance (not significantly different from the best) Global context (other papers) Best at pub — reported result worse than the best known when published (best reported in green)