Explaining spatial information flow in short-term traffic forecasting models using a gated graph attention network
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Short-term traffic forecasting supports real-time monitoring and control of road networks, and graph attention networks (GAT) are the standard means of representing spatial dependence in these models. GAT layers are widely described as capturing the influence of neighbouring locations, but this is seldom verified, because the attention weights offered in support cannot be compared against any measured quantity. That leaves two questions open, how the model should be explained and which of its components are necessary. We address this by adding a gate to the GAT layer which learns, at every sensor and every time step, what share of a sensor's updated state is drawn from its neighbours rather than from itself. Regularising the gate withdraws neighbour information progressively and thereby provides a graded form of ablation. We apply the gated GAT to ST-MetaNet, whose encoder and decoder each place one GAT layer between two recurrent layers, and train it on one calendar year of records from 498 loop detectors on the strategic road network of England. The gate assigns a larger share of neighbour information to sensors carrying heavier traffic and follows the daily and weekly cycle of travel, consistent with adjacent locations being more strongly coupled when busy. Mild regularisation improves accuracy slightly, and accuracy declines at higher strengths as the penalty withdraws information the model needs. The encoder gate closes before the decoder gate, but direct ablation qualifies that ordering. Removing either GAT layer alone leaves accuracy at least as good as keeping both, whereas removing both degrades it substantially, so the two layers are largely redundant rather than either being indispensable. The gated GAT therefore yields a modest accuracy gain, an explanation of where and when spatial information flows, and evidence on which layers the architecture requires.
Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 18 of its 36 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 9 Aug 2026.
Builds on
18 of 36 references.
References · 18
- 2017Attention Is All You Needcited by 60,361
- 2017Graph Attention Networkscited by 8,923
- 2014Learning Phrase Representations using RNN Encoder-Decoder for Statistical Machine Translationcited by 4,057
- 2018The Lottery Ticket Hypothesis: Finding Sparse, Trainable Neural Networkscited by 2,262
- 2015Learning both Weights and Connections for Efficient Neural Networkscited by 2,031
- 2018Sanity Checks for Saliency Mapscited by 1,156
- 2013Spectral Networks and Locally Connected Networks on Graphscited by 1,102
- 2019Attention is not Explanationcited by 929
- 2019GNNExplainer: Generating Explanations for Graph Neural Networkscited by 737
- 2019Attention is not not Explanationcited by 636
- 2020Adaptive Graph Convolutional Recurrent Network for Traffic Forecastingcited by 530
- 2018A Benchmark for Interpretability Methods in Deep Neural Networkscited by 476
6 more
- 2020Parameterized Explainer for Graph Neural Networkcited by 426
- 2019Is Attention Interpretable?cited by 389
- 2020Explainability in Graph Neural Networks: A Taxonomic Surveycited by 384
- 2020Interpreting Graph Neural Networks for NLP With Differentiable Edge Maskingcited by 153
- 2020The elephant in the interpretability room: Why use attention as explanation when we have saliency methods?cited by 122
- 2018On the importance of single directions for generalizationcited by 99
Built on by
Not cited yet.