CF-GNNExplainer: Counterfactual Explanations for Graph Neural Networks
About
Given the increasing promise of graph neural networks (GNNs) in real-world applications, several methods have been developed for explaining their predictions. Existing methods for interpreting predictions from GNNs have primarily focused on generating subgraphs that are especially relevant for a particular prediction. However, such methods are not counterfactual (CF) in nature: given a prediction, we want to understand how the prediction can be changed in order to achieve an alternative outcome. In this work, we propose a method for generating CF explanations for GNNs: the minimal perturbation to the input (graph) data such that the prediction changes. Using only edge deletions, we find that our method, CF-GNNExplainer, can generate CF explanations for the majority of instances across three widely used datasets for GNN explanations, while removing less than 3 edges on average, with at least 94\% accuracy. This indicates that CF-GNNExplainer primarily removes edges that are crucial for the original predictions, resulting in minimal CF explanations.
Related benchmarks
| Task | Dataset | Result | Rank | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Counterfactual Explanations | Loan-Decision | Misclassification Rate45 | 19 | |
| Counterfactual Explanation | Aggregate of six datasets (including Cora) | Misclassification Rank (Avg)4.7 | 10 | |
| Counterfactual Explanation | Ogbn-arxiv | Misclassification Rate45 | 10 | |
| Performance of counterfactual explanations | TREE-CYCLES | Misclass Rate49 | 10 | |
| Graph Explanation | TREE-CYCLES synthetic (test) | -- | 8 | |
| Counterfactual Explanation Generation | Community | Validity90 | 7 | |
| Counterfactual Explanation Generation | ogbg-molhiv | Validity54 | 7 | |
| Counterfactual Explanation Generation | IMDB-M | Validity95 | 7 | |
| Node Classification Explanation | TREE-GRID synthetic (test) | Accuracy96 | 5 | |
| Node Classification Explanation | BA-SHAPES synthetic (test) | Accuracy96 | 5 |