mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

Is Meta-Path Attention an Explanation? Evidence of Alignment and Decoupling in Heterogeneous GNNs

arXiv 2602.08500 ↗First posted 9 Feb 2026cs.LGcited by 0

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Meta-path-based heterogeneous graph neural networks aggregate over meta-path-induced views, and their semantic-level attention over meta-path channels is widely used as a narrative for ``which semantics matter.'' We study this assumption empirically by asking: when does meta-path attention reflect meta-path importance, and when can it decouple? A key challenge is that most post-hoc GNN explainers are designed for homogeneous graphs, and naive adaptations to heterogeneous neighborhoods can mix semantics and confound perturbations. To enable a controlled empirical analysis, we introduce MetaXplain, a meta-path-aware post-hoc explanation protocol that applies existing explainers in the native meta-path view domain via (i) view-factorized explanations, (ii) schema-valid channel-wise perturbations, and (iii) fusion-aware attribution, without modifying the underlying predictor. We benchmark representative gradient-, perturbation-, and Shapley-style explainers on ACM, DBLP, and IMDB with HAN and HAN-GCN, comparing against xPath and type-matched random baselines under standard faithfulness metrics. To quantify attention reliability, we propose Meta-Path Attention--Explanation Alignment (MP-AEA), which measures rank correlation between learned attention weights and explanation-derived meta-path contribution scores across random runs. Our results show that meta-path-aware explanations typically outperform random controls, while MP-AEA reveals both high-alignment and statistically significant decoupling regimes depending on the dataset and backbone; moreover, retraining on explanation-induced subgraphs often preserves, and in some noisy regimes improves, predictive performance, suggesting an explanation-as-denoising effect.

Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 17 of its 32 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 9 Feb 2026.

Builds on

17 of 32 references.

References · 17

  1. 2016Grad-CAM: Visual Explanations from Deep Networks via Gradient-based Localizationcited by 6,690
  2. 2013Deep Inside Convolutional Networks: Visualising Image Classification Models and Saliency Mapscited by 2,348
  3. 2019Attention is not Explanationcited by 916
  4. 2019GNNExplainer: Generating Explanations for Graph Neural Networkscited by 735
  5. 2019Heterogeneous Graph Attention Networkcited by 732
  6. 2019Graph Neural Networks for Social Recommendationcited by 711
  7. 2019Attention is not not Explanationcited by 629
  8. 2019Graph Transformer Networkscited by 520
  9. 2020MAGNN: Metapath Aggregated Graph Neural Network for Heterogeneous Graph Embeddingcited by 304
  10. 2021On Explainability of Graph Neural Networks via Subgraph Explorationscited by 280
  11. 2020PGM-Explainer: Probabilistic Graphical Model Explanations for Graph Neural Networkscited by 210
  12. 2021Are we really making much progress? Revisiting, benchmarking, and refining heterogeneous graph neural networkscited by 176
5 more
  1. 2019Explainability Techniques for Graph Convolutional Networkscited by 160
  2. 2021GraphSVX: Shapley Value Explanations for Graph Neural Networkscited by 63
  3. 2020Towards Transparent and Explainable Attention Modelscited by 47
  4. 2024GNNShap: Scalable and Accurate GNN Explanation using Shapley Valuescited by 12
  5. 2025Automated Heterogeneous Network learning with Non-Recursive Message Passingcited by 2

Built on by

Not cited yet.