Language-encoded network topology enables large language models to reason about complex networks
On the map: LLM reasoning → Knowledge- and tool-augmented reasoning
Abstract (arXiv)
Networks describe systems in biology and beyond, from protein interactions and social relationships to power grids and citation records. Reasoning about such systems requires understanding their structure: which elements are central, which connections bridge separate communities, and how it changes when elements are removed. Although large language models (LLMs) excel at natural language, they struggle with such questions when networks are given as edge lists, sentences or measurement tables, because their structural meaning must be inferred. Here we introduce BioGlyph, which compiles network topology into an interpretable and transferable language of structural roles. BioGlyph combines graph partitioning and structural measurements to identify roles such as hubs, community cores and cross-community connectors, and fixed rules to translate them into a universal vocabulary. The representation describes each element through its structural role, supporting evidence and semantic consequences, leaving both the network and the LLM unchanged. Across twenty networks spanning five domains, BioGlyph substantially improves open LLMs' ability to answer structural reasoning questions, outperforming edge-based, numerical and learned representations by up to 26 percentage points in system accuracy. Ablations show that the gain comes from explicitly encoding structural roles in semantically interpretable terms. The gain is more prominent in dense, community-structured networks and diminishes in sparse networks whose topology is more readily inferred from text. In a budding-yeast protein-interaction network, BioGlyph exposes biological organization: cross-community connectors are enriched for essential genes, whereas peripheral proteins are depleted. BioGlyph thus provides an interpretable representation for both language models and scientists to reason about network structure.
Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 13 Oct 2026). Placed in Knowledge- and tool-augmented reasoning, one of 17 directions in LLM reasoning. Builds on 11 of its 52 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 3 Sep 2026.
Builds on
11 of 52 references.
References · 11
- 2024The Llama 3 Herd of Modelscited by 14,486
- 2016Semi-Supervised Classification with Graph Convolutional Networkscited by 11,318
- 2017Graph Attention Networkscited by 8,888
- 2025Qwen3 Technical Reportcited by 8,510
- 2018How Powerful are Graph Neural Networks?cited by 4,373
- 2019Fast Graph Representation Learning with PyTorch Geometriccited by 2,422
- 2018Deep Graph Infomaxcited by 1,104
- 2018Pitfalls of Graph Neural Network Evaluationcited by 1,003
- 2023GPT4Graph: Can Large Language Models Understand Graph Structured Data ? An Empirical Evaluation and Benchmarkingcited by 210
- 2024LLaGA: Large Language and Graph Assistantcited by 179
- 2024Let Your Graph Do the Talking: Encoding Structured Data for LLMscited by 115
Built on by
Not cited yet.
Similar, not cited
Close in wording, no citation either way
- 2025GraphGhost: Tracing Structures Behind Large Language Models
- 2025From Sequence to Structure: Uncovering Substructure Reasoning in Transformers
- 2025Bayesian Network Structure Discovery Using Large Language Models
- 2026Graph Property Inference in Small Language Models: Effects of Representation and Reasoning Strategy
- 2025When Structure Doesn't Help: LLMs Do Not Read Text-Attributed Graphs as Effectively as We Expected
- 2026Higher-Order Knowledge Representations for Agentic Scientific Reasoning
- 2025From Sentences to Sequences: Rethinking Languages in Biological System
- 2025BioMaze: Benchmarking and Enhancing Large Language Models for Biological Pathway Reasoning