Papers › Utilizing Description Logics for Global Explanations of Heterogeneous Graph Neural Networks

Utilizing Description Logics for Global Explanations of Heterogeneous Graph Neural Networks

21 May 2024arXiv:2405.12654archive 2025-07-28

Dominik Köhler, Stefan Heindorf

Graph Neural Networks (GNNs) are effective for node classification in graph-structured data, but they lack explainability, especially at the global level. Current research mainly utilizes subgraphs of the input as local explanations or generates new graphs as global explanations. However, these graph-based methods are limited in their ability to explain classes with multiple sufficient explanations. To provide more expressive explanations, we propose utilizing class expressions (CEs) from the field of description logic (DL). Our approach explains heterogeneous graphs with different types of nodes using CEs in the EL description logic. To identify the best explanation among multiple candidate explanations, we employ and compare two different scoring functions: (1) For a given CE, we construct multiple graphs, have the GNN make a prediction for each graph, and aggregate the predicted scores. (2) We score the CE in terms of fidelity, i.e., we compare the predictions of the GNN to the predictions by the CE on a separate validation set. Instead of subgraph-based explanations, we offer CE-based explanations.

Code

Repository list and official/mentioned flags are the archive's, frozen 2025-07-28. Reachability, where shown, is from one Syntology probe window (2026-09-16 to 2026-09-18); repositories not probed show nothing. GitHub stars are not tracked.

Code Syntology ran Syntology

14 samples harvested; 10 ran; 0 honoured the contract we drafted; 4 have no recorded run. Read from Syntology's graph 2026-09-24; that is when this build read the record, not when the samples ran.

Licence: 14 of the 14 samples are pointer only, meaning Syntology does not serve that copy's text. This page shows no code text for any sample; each one links to its file in the repository.

Harvested from ds-jrg/xgnn-dl. “Ran” means the sample executed on a synthesized input. It does not mean the output is correct, and nothing here reproduces the paper's results. “Honoured” and “violated” refer to a contract Syntology drafted from the code itself; “our draft was wrong” and “fixture could not drive it” are failures of Syntology's instrument, not of the code.

Each sample ends with its code_sha256, Syntology's identity for that exact code. An agent fetches the stored sample with Syntology's MCP tool get_code(code_sha256="…") (how to connect); click an identity to copy that call.

Repository labels, per sample. official repository: The archive marks this repository official for the paper. named in the paper: The archive records that the paper mentions this repository; it is not marked official. community (archive-listed): In the archive's code links for this paper, not marked official and not recorded as mentioned in the paper. found in paper text by Syntology: Syntology found this repository in the paper's own text; whether it is the authors' implementation is not asserted. community: Not in the archive's code links for this paper; a community repository Syntology harvested. Samples from a repository marked official are listed first. Licence labels name the repository's licence as recorded at harvest. “Pointer only” means Syntology does not serve that copy's text, for one of four reasons: no licence file was found; the licence was not identified; the licence is recorded as permissive but that copy's record is not marked cleared; or the licence is outside the permissive list Syntology serves text under (MIT, Apache-2.0, BSD and similar). Some licences outside that list permit redistribution, such as WTFPL, and GPL-3.0 under its conditions; they are simply not on the list. Hover a licence label for the reason. File links open the file on GitHub at the default branch, which may have changed since the harvest.

Tasks

Results from the paper archive 2025-07-28

No leaderboard rows for this paper in the archive.

Report a problem or propose a change · a person checks every report against the paper or source before anything changes; decisions are listed on /corrections