ArticleNeurocomputing2026
GNN-EGG: Graph neural network explanations via graph generation.
Article in Neurocomputing, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Recent advances in the application of artificial intelligence and wearable devices in volleyball.Frontiers in sports and active living · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Graph Neural Networks (GNNs) provide a means for modeling inherently graphical data, such as transportation, social, and molecular networks, but also for enhancing and reducing unstructured data, including text and images. A potential shortcoming is that their predictions are opaque-a black box-hindering broader adoption and refinement. In this paper, we propose a novel architecture-agnostic algorithm, GNN-EGG (Graph Neural Network Explanations via Graph Generation), for GNN classifiers. As a model-level post-hoc explanation method, GNN-EGG can learn the data generating distribution for each class of graphs. The primary contribution of this work is the use of a differentiable approximation to Graph Edit Distance (GED) in the loss function. This term enables us to ensure consistency in both the graph space and the embedding space for our representative examples. It also reduces the random baseline issue where completely random graphs can still yield similar embeddings and strong predictions as reported in previous work. We benchmark our algorithm against the current state-of-the-art models using the mutagenic molecules dataset (MUTAG) and apply our method to a large-scale GNN for malignancy detection in digital pathology tasks. The official implementation of this method can be found at this GitHub repository.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.