Reference-Tail Trust:Certified Probability Floors for Learned Updates Inside a Deployed Network
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Graph neural networks (GNNs) need to exploit improved message passing without surrendering control over predictions already trusted in deployment. We introduce Reference-Tail Trust (RTT), a framework that admits learned updates inside a frozen GNN and certifies the prediction actually served. RTT couples graph-based proposal states with a constrained internal optimizer: each displacement is charged for its worst-case terminal cross-entropy increase through the incumbent's remaining message-passing layers. A trajectory-validated tube and an independent checker enforce per-node probability floors, psic ≥ e^-Hrow pric, and a call-level budget, sumi wi D_∞(pri | psi) ≤ H^+, uniformly over labels. Calls whose adapted outputs pass certification require no separate full incumbent rollout; failed certificates trigger whole-call fallback. We derive the exact probability-floor frontier by water-filling, characterize architecture-constrained efficiency, and establish conditions under which internal propagation exploits evidence unavailable to restricted output correctors. In the reported ogbn-arxiv audit, RTT achieves 6.5× 10-3 nats of mean gain per call, with a one-sided 95% regression-rate upper bound of 0.95% and a 95% negative-flip upper bound of 0.51% on the uninspected part of the reserved node population. Its mean gain is 61% of a cross-fitted posterior-based frontier estimate and exceeds the strongest matched one-pass corrector by +0.9× 10-3 nats. Reported experiments span eight proposals, six graph-incumbent families, structural and temporal graph shifts, and molecular prediction, with additional image and tabular evaluations. RTT makes GNN adaptation a budgeted, certifiable inference decision rather than an unconditional model replacement.
Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 47 of its 55 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 28 Sep 2026.
Builds on
47 of 55 references.
References · 47
- 2015Deep Residual Learning for Image Recognitioncited by 52,096
- 2017Proximal Policy Optimization Algorithmscited by 15,215
- 2016Semi-Supervised Classification with Graph Convolutional Networkscited by 11,361
- 2017Inductive Representation Learning on Large Graphscited by 6,320
- 2017On Calibration of Modern Neural Networkscited by 4,960
- 2018How Powerful are Graph Neural Networks?cited by 4,393
- 2019Benchmarking Neural Network Robustness to Common Corruptions and Perturbationscited by 2,877
- 2020Open Graph Benchmark: Datasets for Machine Learning on Graphscited by 2,163
- 2019Can You Trust Your Model's Uncertainty? Evaluating Predictive Uncertainty Under Dataset Shiftcited by 1,287
- 2018Predict then Propagate: Graph Neural Networks meet Personalized PageRankcited by 993
- 2020Simple and Deep Graph Convolutional Networkscited by 860
- 2021Robust fine-tuning of zero-shot modelscited by 797
35 more
- 2020Adaptive Universal Generalized PageRank Graph Neural Networkcited by 595
- 2019Multi-scale Attributed Node Embeddingcited by 548
- 2022Efficient Test-Time Model Adaptation without Forgettingcited by 469
- 2021Retiring Adult: New Datasets for Fair Machine Learningcited by 449
- 2018Efficient Neural Network Robustness Certification with General Activation Functionscited by 445
- 2023Towards Stable Test-Time Adaptation in Dynamic Wild Worldcited by 415
- 2022Confident Adaptive Language Modelingcited by 310
- 2021Learn then Test: Calibrating Predictive Algorithms to Achieve Risk Controlcited by 271
- 2021GRAND: Graph Neural Diffusioncited by 258
- 2020The Lipschitz Constant of Self-Attentioncited by 174
- 2020Estimating means of bounded random variables by bettingcited by 169
- 2019Anti-Money Laundering in Bitcoin: Experimenting with Graph Convolutional Networks for Financial Forensicscited by 164
- 2022Handling Distribution Shifts on Graphs: An Invariance Perspectivecited by 164
- 2022GOOD: A Graph Out-of-Distribution Benchmarkcited by 141
- 2021GNNAutoScale: Scalable and Expressive Graph Neural Networks via Historical Embeddingscited by 90
- 2020Robust Validation: Confident Predictions Even When Distributions Shiftcited by 82
- 2022Empowering Graph Representation Learning with Test-Time Graph Transformationcited by 67
- 2020Positive-Congruent Training: Towards Regression-Free Model Updatescited by 57
- 2023RDumb: A simple approach that questions our progress in continual test-time adaptationcited by 53
- 2022What Makes Graph Neural Networks Miscalibrated?cited by 40
- 2021Lipschitz Normalization for Self-Attention Layers with Application to Graph Neural Networkscited by 39
- 2020An Empirical Analysis of Backward Compatibility in Machine Learning Systemscited by 38
- 2023Cooperative Graph Neural Networkscited by 36
- 2020ReluDiff: Differential Verification of Deep Neural Networkscited by 29
- 2025To Steer or Not to Steer? Mechanistic Error Reduction with Abstention for Language Modelscited by 29
- 2023Adaptive Message Passing: A General Framework to Mitigate Oversmoothing, Oversquashing, and Underreachingcited by 24
- 2020NeuroDiff: Scalable Differential Verification of Neural Networks using Fine-Grained Approximationcited by 22
- 2021Backward-Compatible Prediction Updates: A Probabilistic Approachcited by 14
- 2024Matcha: Mitigating Graph Structure Shifts with Test-Time Adaptationcited by 10
- 2026Conformal Policy Controlcited by 6
- 2024SoundnessBench: A Soundness Benchmark for Neural Network Verifierscited by 5
- 2024Revisiting Differential Verification: Equivalence Verification with Confidencecited by 4
- 2025Structural Alignment Improves Graph Test-Time Adaptationcited by 2
- 2026Pay Only for Disagreement: Certified No-Regression Verdicts for Model Updates with Matching Label-Complexity Boundscited by 2
- 2026Certifying Model Upgrades with Slice-Wise Non-Regression and Incumbent Fallbackcited by 1
Built on by
Not cited yet.