From Model to Data (M2D): Shifting Complexity from GNNs to Graphs for Transparent Graph Learning

Debolina Halder Lina, Arlei Silva

Main figure for From Model to Data (M2D): Shifting Complexity from GNNs to Graphs for Transparent Graph Learning

Abstract

Graph Neural Networks (GNNs) achieve high performance but can be opaque to humans, making it difficult to understand and compare the many proposed architectures. While existing explainability methods attribute individual predictions to nodes, edges, or features, they do not provide architectural transparency or explain the fundamental performance gap between simple and more complex models. To address this limitation, we introduce Model-to-Data (M2D) distillation, a new framework that increases transparency by transferring model complexity into the data space. M2D distills the teacher model into an augmented graph with enriched features and structure, enabling a simple student to match the teacher's performance. By materializing model behavior in the data, our approach allows humans to inspect architectural advantages directly. We show that M2D reveals underlying mechanisms such as fairness objectives and attention-based aggregation in an interpretable way, enhancing GNN transparency while preserving performance.

Proposed method: M2D

Benchmark Results

Tested on 5 datasets 8 baseline values reported too low

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

Classic

#ModelAccuracy ↑Paper
1
GraphSAGE+CNA
0.9418 ±0.0033
2
GCN+CNA
0.9366 ±0.0048
3
TransformerConv
0.9350 ±0.0058
21
GCN
0.9004
44
GAT
actual #44 vs paper #648 604 places worse
0.8897 ±0.0014
best reported
actual #44 vs paper #648 604 places worse
paper 0.8024 ±0.0028
171
GT
actual #171 vs paper #730 559 places worse
0.8642
best reported
actual #171 vs paper #730 559 places worse
paper 0.7742 ±0.0012
best at pub: Language is All a Graph Needs (2023)
paper 0.7742 ±0.0012 Δ at pub 0.0900 Δ today 0.0900
468
M2D
0.8250 ±0.0041
This paper
573
GCN (Feat.)
0.8151 ±0.0041
This paper
724
MLP
0.7768
865
MLP (Feat.)
0.6458 ±0.0013
This paper
#ModelAccuracy ↑Paper
1
CNA
0.9575 ±0.0058
2
IS-GIB
0.9390 ±0.0187
3
EERM
0.9112 ±0.0145
35
GAT
actual #35 vs paper #302 267 places worse
0.8080 ±0.0026
best reported
actual #35 vs paper #302 267 places worse
paper 0.7321 ±0.0021
paper 0.7321 ±0.0021 Δ at pub 0.0759
44
GCN
0.8033 ±0.0088
335
GCN (Feat.)
0.7297 ±0.0042
This paper
350
MLP
0.7289 ±0.0010
639
MLP (Feat.)
0.6948 ±0.0021
This paper
768
GT
0.6528 ±0.0011
This paper
#ModelAccuracy ↑Paper
1
GraphTARIF
0.9703 ±0.0019
2
GAT
actual #2 vs paper #384 382 places worse
0.9669 ±0.0014
best reported
actual #2 vs paper #384 382 places worse
paper 0.9135 ±0.0032
3
GAT+T
0.9660 ±0.0007
7
SAGE
0.9643 ±0.0027
90
GT
actual #90 vs paper #90
0.9420 ±0.0016
actual #90 vs paper #90
paper 0.9420 ±0.0016
paper 0.9420 ±0.0016 Δ at pub 0.0292
390
MLP
0.9128 ±0.0063
397
GCN (Both)
0.9117 ±0.0039
This paper
498
MLP (Feat.)
0.8694 ±0.0014
This paper

Heterophilic Graphs

#ModelAccuracy ↑Paper
1
P^2GNN
0.9672 ±0.0147
2
DoG
0.9660 ±0.0210
3
GPF-plus
0.9583 ±0.0419
34
MLP
0.9230 ±0.0070
53
GraphSAGE
0.9000 ±0.0365
166
GT
actual #166 vs paper #340 174 places worse
0.8408 ±0.0560
best reported
actual #166 vs paper #340 174 places worse
paper 0.7389 ±0.0014
paper 0.7389 ±0.0014 Δ at pub 0.1019
211
GAT
actual #211 vs paper #447 236 places worse
0.8162 ±0.0645
best reported
actual #211 vs paper #447 236 places worse
paper 0.6431 ±0.0024
paper 0.6431 ±0.0024 Δ at pub 0.1731
318
MLP (Van.)
0.7527 ±0.0020
This paper
437
GCN (Feat.)
0.6559 ±0.0022
This paper
#ModelAccuracy ↑Paper
1
P^2GNN
0.9541 ±0.0272
2
ACM-GCN
0.9480 ±0.0380
3
RF-GCN
0.9429
24
MLP
0.9136 ±0.0070
138
SAGE
0.8269
158
GAT
actual #158 vs paper #446 288 places worse
0.8190 ±0.0540
best reported
actual #158 vs paper #446 288 places worse
paper 0.5367 ±0.0041
paper 0.5367 ±0.0041 Δ at pub 0.2823
179
GT
actual #179 vs paper #280 101 places worse
0.8000 ±0.0490
best reported
actual #179 vs paper #280 101 places worse
paper 0.7059 ±0.0012
paper 0.7059 ±0.0012 Δ at pub 0.0941
317
MLP (Van.)
0.6634 ±0.0018
This paper
388
M2D
0.5914 ±0.0023
This paper
417
GCN (Feat.)
0.5714 ±0.0023
This paper
SOTA performance (not significantly different from the best) Proposed method (this paper) Baseline / comparison (this paper) Global context (other papers) Best at pub — reported result worse than the best known when published (best reported in green) Best at pub — reported value improved over the best known when published