Declarative Explanations for Graph Neural Networks: A Demonstration

Explainable Artificial Intelligence aims to make black-box models more trustworthy by presenting, in a human-understandable manner, the elements that lead to the model's output. This involves both (i) identifying components and connections with genuine causal influence on outputs and (ii) translating such structures into an interpretable representation. For the former, we introduce CIExplainer, a novel perturbation-based method grounded in causal inference for explaining Graph Neural Networks (GNNs). CIExplainer identifies the subgraph with the highest causal effects on GNN predictions using the Potential Outcome Framework. We evaluate and compare CIExplainer on various GNN architectures (GCN, GraphSAGE, GAT, GIN) and datasets. To bridge subgraph explanations with human interpretability, we further propose G2TeXplainer, a method that transforms causal subgraphs into natural language explanations that capture both feature-level and relational information.

Graph Neural Networks (GNNs) achieve strong performance on node classification tasks but remain difficult to interpret, particularly with respect to which input features drive their predictions. Existing global GNN explainers operate at the structural level identifying recurring subgraph motifs, but none explain model behaviour globally at the level of input node attributes. We propose GRAFT, a posthoc global explanation framework that identifies class-level feature importance profiles for GNNs. The method combines diversity-guided exemplar selection, Integrated Gradients-based attribution, and aggregation to construct a global view of feature influence for each class, which can be further expressed as concise natural language rules using a large language model with self-refinement. We evaluate GRAFT across multiple datasets, architectures, and experimental settings, demonstrating its effectiveness in capturing model-relevant features, supporting bias analysis, and enabling feature-efficient transfer learning. In addition, we introduce a structured human evaluation protocol to assess the interpretability of generated rules along dimensions such as accuracy and usefulness. Our results suggest that GRAFT provides a practical and interpretable approach for analysing feature-level behaviour in GNNs, bridging quantitative attribution with human-understandable explanations.

Explainers for Graph Neural Networks (GNNs) are commonly evaluated by their plausibility, i.e., how well their explanations recover a predefined ground truth, such as a motif planted in the data. This protocol implicitly assumes that a GNN trained on such data relies on the intended motif. Although prior work has questioned this assumption, plausibility remains widespread. First, we show that the assumption is violated on several widely used benchmarks, where, e.g., degree statistics alone suffice to solve the task. Then, we remove this confounder by replacing training with compilation. We achieve this by introducing $\mathsf{Gracr}$, the first compiler translating graded modal logic formulas into GNN weights, yielding models that replicate the behaviour of the corresponding formulas. Since the behaviour of the model is now known by construction, we can define its ground truth explanation formally and compute it exactly. Building on this, we introduce $\mathsf{Gracr}\mathsf{Bench}$, a benchmark of compiled GNNs for the evaluation of explainers against this exact ground truth. Experiments on eleven explainers across six tasks show its effectiveness for fine-grained diagnostic evaluation: notably, we discover that most explainers are not robust to indirect influences or alternative implementations of the same formula. These results position $\mathsf{Gracr}\mathsf{Bench}$ as a novel, rigorous evaluation setting for graph post-hoc explainability.