Evaluates the predictive accuracy of GNN models and the effectiveness of post-hoc explanation methods on synthetic and real-world graph classification and node classification tasks. It probes whether a parameterized explainer can learn global explanatory motifs end-to-end and generalize inductively without retraining. Use when the user wants to benchmark on BA-Shapes, BA-Community, Tree-Cycles, Tree-Grid, BA-2motifs, MUTAG, or asks about evaluating this task. Reports Accuracy.
Scanned 9/11/2026
Install to Claude Code
npx -y skills add qhjqhj00/research-skills-pool --skill pgexplainer-gnn-eval --agent claude-codeInstalls into .claude/skills of the current project.
Are you the author of Pgexplainer Gnn Eval?
Add the live security badge to your README — it updates automatically with every re-scan.
[](https://www.skillsdirectory.com/skills/qhjqhj00-pgexplainer-gnn-eval)More formats (shields.io, HTML) on the badges page.
---
name: pgexplainer-gnn-eval
description: Evaluates the predictive accuracy of GNN models and the effectiveness of post-hoc explanation methods on synthetic and real-world graph classification and node classification tasks. It probes whether a parameterized explainer can learn global explanatory motifs end-to-end and generalize inductively without retraining. Use when the user wants to benchmark on BA-Shapes, BA-Community, Tree-Cycles, Tree-Grid, BA-2motifs, MUTAG, or asks about evaluating this task. Reports Accuracy.
metadata:
skill_kind: dataset_eval
source_arxiv: 2011.04573
bibtex_key: luo2020pgexplainer
confidence: medium
---
# pgexplainer-gnn-eval
> Parameterized Explainer for Graph Neural Network — Luo et al. (2020) (arXiv:2011.04573, 2020)
## What this evaluates
Evaluates the predictive accuracy of GNN models and the effectiveness of post-hoc explanation methods on synthetic and real-world graph classification and node classification tasks. It probes whether a parameterized explainer can learn global explanatory motifs end-to-end and generalize inductively without retraining.
## Datasets
- **BA-Shapes** — total ?; splits: train (-1), val (-1), test (-1)
- **BA-Community** — total ?; splits: train (-1), val (-1), test (-1)
- **Tree-Cycles** — total ?; splits: train (-1), val (-1), test (-1)
- **Tree-Grid** — total ?; splits: train (-1), val (-1), test (-1)
- **BA-2motifs** — total ?; splits: train (-1), val (-1), test (-1)
- **MUTAG** — total ?; splits: train (-1), val (-1), test (-1)
## Metrics
- `Accuracy` **(primary)** — range: percent
- Standard classification accuracy: the proportion of correctly predicted labels out of the total number of instances.
## Input / output format
**Input**: Graph-structured data containing node features, adjacency matrices, and node or graph-level labels for classification tasks.
**Output**: Predicted class labels for nodes or graphs, and binary edge/node importance scores for explanation methods.
## Scoring recipe
```python
def compute_accuracy(predictions, gold_labels):
correct = sum(1 for p, g in zip(predictions, gold_labels) if p == g)
return correct / len(gold_labels) * 100
```
## Common pitfalls
- GNN models must be fully trained first and then shared with all post-hoc explanation methods rather than training them jointly.
- The dataset split is fixed at 80/10/10 for train/validation/test across all datasets.
- PGExplainer requires careful temperature annealing (tau0=5.0 to tauT=2.0) to balance discrete sampling and backpropagation optimization.
## Evidence (verbatim from paper)
> We follow GNNExplainer to split train/validation/test with 80/10/10% for all datasets. Each model is trained for 1000 epochs. The accuracy performances of GNN models are shown in Table 3.
## Citation
```bibtex
@misc{luo2020pgexplainer,
title={Parameterized Explainer for Graph Neural Network},
author={Luo et al. (2020)},
year={2020},
note={arXiv:2011.04573}
}
```
- arXiv: 2011.04573
Is this your skill, or is something wrong with this listing? Request removal or report an issue. Author removals are honored within 72 hours.
No comments yet. Be the first to comment!