Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 major objections 1 minor 1 cited by

Graph Neural Networks Are Not Continuous Across Graph Resolutions

T0 review · 2 major / 1 minor · reviewed 2026-06-28 · grok-4.3

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗

Pith's one-line read Graph neural networks are not continuous across graph resolutions and assign different embeddings to the same object at different scales.

desk verdict GNNs can produce very different outputs on the same object sampled at different resolutions because of how message passing works, and the authors give a targeted fix plus experiments. read the letter →

arxiv 2605.31315 v1 pith:SEBAUZRM submitted 2026-05-29 cs.LG

Christian Koke , Yuesong Shen , Abhishek Saroha , Marvin Eisenberger , Bastian Rieck , Michael Bronstein , Daniel Cremers This is my paper
classification cs.LG
keywords graphneuralnetworkscontinuityresolutionmessagepassinginformationpropagationscaleconsistencylatentrepresentationsconvergence
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

The paper shows that standard graph neural networks fail to produce continuous outputs when graphs representing the same object are sampled at different resolutions. Two graphs that are very similar under natural notions of convergence can therefore receive substantially different latent embeddings. The authors locate the source of this discontinuity in the information-propagation rules used by most GNNs. They derive a targeted architectural change that restores continuity across scales and demonstrate that the change permits reliable generalization between resolutions. The result matters for any setting where the same physical or abstract object must be analyzed at multiple levels of detail.

What carries the argument

Structural obstruction in standard information-propagation schemes of GNNs, removed by a derived architectural modification that enforces continuity across graph resolutions.

What would settle it

A controlled test in which the modified architecture produces nearly identical embeddings for two graphs of the same object at different resolutions while an unmodified GNN produces markedly different embeddings.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

Contrary to conventional wisdom, graph neural networks are not continuous with respect to all natural modes of graph convergence. As a result, GNNs may generate substantially different latent representations for graphs that are very similar. In particular they assign vastly different latent embeddings to graphs that represent the same underlying object at different resolution scales. We trace this failure of continuity back to a structural obstruction arising from commonly used information-propagation schemes. Building on this insight we then derive a principled modification to standard GNN architectures which equips models with continuity across scales. The proposed modification enables con

Load-bearing premise

The discontinuity is produced by the information-propagation rules themselves rather than by other parts of the model or by properties of the input data.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • GNNs generate substantially different latent representations for graphs that are very similar under standard convergence notions.
  • Without the modification, models cannot reliably generalize between graphs of the same object observed at different resolutions.
  • The modification permits consistent integration of data from multiple resolution scales within a single model.
  • Numerical experiments across a range of tasks confirm that the modified models behave continuously where standard models do not.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • Tasks that routinely combine graphs at multiple granularities, such as molecular property prediction at atom versus residue level, would benefit directly from the continuity fix.
  • The same structural issue may appear in other message-passing architectures and could be diagnosed by checking embedding stability under successive coarsening operations.
  • Future work could test whether the modification also improves robustness when graphs are obtained from noisy or incomplete observations at varying densities.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

2 major / 1 minor

Summary. The paper claims that, contrary to conventional wisdom, GNNs are not continuous with respect to all natural modes of graph convergence (especially resolution scaling), because standard message-passing schemes contain a structural obstruction that produces substantially different latent embeddings for graphs representing the same underlying object at different scales. The authors derive a principled architectural modification that restores continuity across scales and validate the theoretical findings with a wide range of numerical experiments.

Significance. If the derivation of the obstruction and the proposed fix are correct, the result would be significant: it identifies a concrete limitation in how GNNs handle multi-resolution data and supplies a modification that enables consistent cross-scale generalization. The systematic experimental validation is a positive feature that strengthens the practical relevance of the claim.

major comments (2)
  1. [Abstract] Abstract and theoretical tracing: the central claim that discontinuity arises from a structural feature of standard propagation schemes (rather than other architectural or data factors) is load-bearing, yet the abstract provides no explicit definition of continuity, no statement of the precise convergence modes, and no derivation. Without these elements the support for the claim cannot be verified.
  2. [Abstract] Proposed modification: the manuscript states that a principled change equips models with continuity across scales, but the abstract gives no indication of whether the modification is parameter-free, whether it preserves the original GNN expressivity, or how it interacts with the original propagation rule. These details are required to evaluate whether the fix actually resolves the identified obstruction.
minor comments (1)
  1. [Abstract] The phrase 'natural modes of graph convergence' should be defined at the first use with a short formal statement or reference to the relevant literature on graph limits.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the constructive feedback and positive assessment of the paper's significance. We address the two major comments on the abstract below and will revise the abstract in the resubmitted version to incorporate the suggested clarifications.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Abstract] Abstract and theoretical tracing: the central claim that discontinuity arises from a structural feature of standard propagation schemes (rather than other architectural or data factors) is load-bearing, yet the abstract provides no explicit definition of continuity, no statement of the precise convergence modes, and no derivation. Without these elements the support for the claim cannot be verified.

    Authors: We agree that the abstract would be strengthened by including a brief definition of continuity with respect to graph resolutions and an explicit reference to the resolution-scaling convergence mode. The structural obstruction in message-passing is derived in Section 3; we will add a short parenthetical note directing readers to this section while keeping the abstract concise. revision: yes

  2. Referee: [Abstract] Proposed modification: the manuscript states that a principled change equips models with continuity across scales, but the abstract gives no indication of whether the modification is parameter-free, whether it preserves the original GNN expressivity, or how it interacts with the original propagation rule. These details are required to evaluate whether the fix actually resolves the identified obstruction.

    Authors: The modification is parameter-free, acts by rescaling the aggregation operator in a manner that commutes with the original propagation rule, and preserves the original expressivity class. We will insert a single sentence in the revised abstract stating these properties to make the nature of the fix transparent. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity detected

full rationale

The paper derives discontinuity of standard GNN message-passing from first-principles analysis of information propagation under graph resolution changes, then proposes an explicit architectural modification and validates it experimentally. No quoted step reduces a claimed result to a fitted parameter, self-definition, or load-bearing self-citation chain; the central argument is presented as an independent structural observation supported by external numerical checks rather than by construction from its own inputs.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 0 assumptions · 0 invented entities

Based solely on the abstract; no specific free parameters, axioms, or invented entities can be identified from the provided information.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Graph Neural Networks Are Not Continuous Across Graph Resolutions." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/SEBAUZRM

@misc{pith2026260531315,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Graph Neural Networks Are Not Continuous Across Graph Resolutions},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/SEBAUZRM}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2605.31315}
}
read the original abstract

We show that contrary to conventional wisdom in the community, graph neural networks (GNNs) are not continuous with respect to all natural modes of graph convergence. As a result, GNNs may generate substantially different latent representations for graphs that are very similar. In particular they assign vastly different latent embeddings to graphs that represent the same underlying object at different resolution scales. We trace this failure of continuity back to a structural obstruction arising from commonly used information-propagation schemes. Building on this insight we then derive a principled modification to standard GNN architectures which equips models with continuity across scales. The proposed modification enables consistent integration of distinct resolutions and reliable generalization between them. We systematically validate our theoretical findings in a wide range of numerical experiments.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2605.31315 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. , this is done via standard graph coarsification (Loukas & Vandergheynst, 2018b; Loukas, 2019); Appendix G.1 provides exact details. (a) (b) [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Collapsing Procedure visualized If standard GNN architectures were continuous, the conver￾gence of this graph modification process in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. (a) Effective propagation vs. (b) true coarse graph G As a consequence of the information flows over the graphs Gω, G being vastly different, the latent embeddings Fω, F that are being generated for the two graphs differ greatly. At first glance, it may seem that the observations above apply only to the QM7 dataset. There edge weights scale inversely with distance, so sequences of graphs with diverging weights arise… view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (23 more)
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Latent distance ∥Fω − F∥ From [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_3.png]
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: (a) Gω. (b) Scaled edges of Gω in red. (c) G. As we let ω → ∞, the heat kernel on G then more and more resembles the one on G. To visualize this fact, we exemplar￾ily plot in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_5.png]
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: ∥e −tLω − J ↑ e −tLJ ↓ ∥-plot for graphs (a) & (b) For fixed t > 0 we see that ∥e −tLω −J ↑ e −tLJ ↓∥ → 0 as ω increases. Additionally, the decay ∥e −tLω − J ↑ e −tLJ ↓∥ → 0 for increasing t is faster, the larger w is chosen. This is congruent with our intuition: The s…
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Latent distance ∥Fω − F∥. Latent embeddings generated by Laplace transform based GNNs converge; others do not. Resulting Generalization Ability: In Section 4 we had identified lack of continuity as the obstruction to generaliz￾ing across scales. As verified above, grap…
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Node-Classification-Accuracy (↑) and uncertainty (for 100 runs) vs. clique size. The classification accuracies of methods not employing Laplace-transform propagation decrease significantly with increasing clique size (cf [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_8.png]
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: Graphs G1, G2 whose renormalized adjacency matrices are similar (Aˆ1 ≈ Aˆ2), but whose heat kernels differ significantly. This is not the case for Laplace-transform propagation based networks (using either resolvent or exponential propagation 7 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figure…
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: E[∥Fp − F∥] [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_11.png]
Figure 12
Figure 12. Figure 12: Graphs approximating torus-manifold (two resolutions). As evident from [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_12.png]
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: Graphs drawn from an SBM as the intra-cluster connec￾tivity is varied from p = 0 to p = 1. We then compare latent embeddings Fp generated for graphs drawn from an SBM at intra-cluster connectivity p with the latent embeddings F generated for a coarse grained version o…
Figure 13
Figure 13. Figure 13: Impulse response In contrast to that, the impulse response for the Laplace￾transform based methods of Section 7.1 stays consistent as the mesh resolution is varied. To show that this persists 8 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_13.png]
Figure 14
Figure 14. Figure 14: Graph level latent distance ∥FN −F2N ∥ as N increases. 9. Discussion Our paper analyzed the discontinuity of existing GNNs across scales. We found the underlying obstruction to origi￾nate in commonly-used propagation schemes. We derived modifications to turn GNNs cont…
Figure 15
Figure 15. Figure 15: (a) Graph G with Ereg. (blue) & Ehigh (red); (b) Greg.; (c) Ghigh; (d) Greg., exclusive This decomposition induces two graph structures corresponding to the disjoint edge sets on the node set G: We set Greg. := (G, Ereg.) and Ghigh := (G, Ehigh) c.f [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:…
Figure 16
Figure 16. Figure 16 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p020_16.png]
Figure 17
Figure 17. Figure 17: Limit graph corresponding to [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p023_17.png]
Figure 18
Figure 18. Figure 18: Three node Graph G with on large weight w12 ≫ 1. Given states {Xℓ 1 , Xℓ 2 , Xℓ 3} in layer ℓ, a limit propagation scheme as in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p027_18.png]
Figure 19
Figure 19. Figure 19: (a) Original graph G (b) Coarse grained G We have a high resolution graph G with associated Laplacian L and node-feature matrix X. We also have a lower resolution graph G, with associated Laplacian L and node-feature matrix X := J ↓X arising from the original node fea…
Figure 20
Figure 20. Figure 20: ∥e −Lt − J ↑ e −tLJ ↓ ∥ for molecules in QM7 Exemplarily considering exponential propagation matrices (cf. Section 6) we have (with tk = k) that R ∞ 0 |ψˆ k(t)|∥e −tL − J ↑ e −tLJ ↓∥dt = ∥e −kL − J ↑ e −kLJ ↓∥, we thus have ∥F − F∥ ≲ maxk≥1 |η(k)|. Investigating the d…
Figure 21
Figure 21. Figure 21: (a) Example Graph (b) Varying the parameter pconnect ∈ [0, 1] for fixed csize = 60, pinter = 2/c2 size and cnumber = 12. We have chosen pinter = 2/c2 size so that – on average – clusters are connected by two edges. The choice of two edges (as opposed to 1, 3, 4, 5, ..…
Figure 22
Figure 22. Figure 22: Individual nodes (a) replaced by k-cliques (b) over λ ∈ {0.0001, 0.0005}. We choose a two-layer deep convolutional architecture with the dimensions of hidden features optimized over Kℓ ∈ {32, 64, 128}. (238) In addition to the hyperparemeters specified above, some bas…
Figure 23
Figure 23. Figure 23: Distinct Torus Discretizations The concept of operators capturing the geometry of underlying spaces also applies to manifolds M, where the Laplace￾Beltrami operator ∆M can be thought of as a continuous analogue of the Graph Laplacian (Hein et al., 2006). This is hence…
Figure 24
Figure 24. Figure 24: (a) G (stongly connected) clusters in red (b) Coarse grained G In the limit where edge-weights within certain sub-graphs tend to infinity, information within these clusters equalizes immediately. Such clusters thus effectively behave as single nodes. We might thus con…
Figure 25
Figure 25. Figure 25 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p046_25.png]
Figure 26
Figure 26. Figure 26: Histogram of |Rij | for resolvent matrix R on (a) ms academic and (b) pubmed . As is evident from [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p052_26.png]

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score.

  1. Train Small, Deploy Large: Zero-Shot GNN Transfer Through Geometric Renormalization

    cs.LG 2026-07 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    GNN weights trained on geometric-renormalization replicas of graphs transfer zero-shot to the original graph with largely preserved accuracy.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

72 extracted references · 24 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper

  1. [1]

    @esa (Ref

    \@ifxundefined[1] #1\@undefined \@firstoftwo \@secondoftwo \@ifnum[1] #1 \@firstoftwo \@secondoftwo \@ifx[1] #1 \@firstoftwo \@secondoftwo [2] @ #1 \@temptokena #2 #1 @ \@temptokena \@ifclassloaded agu2001 natbib The agu2001 class already includes natbib coding, so you should not add it explicitly Type <Return> for now, but then later remove the command n...

  2. [2]

    \@lbibitem[] @bibitem@first@sw\@secondoftwo \@lbibitem[#1]#2 \@extra@b@citeb \@ifundefined br@#2\@extra@b@citeb \@namedef br@#2 \@nameuse br@#2\@extra@b@citeb \@ifundefined b@#2\@extra@b@citeb @num @parse #2 @tmp #1 NAT@b@open@#2 NAT@b@shut@#2 \@ifnum @merge>\@ne @bibitem@first@sw \@firstoftwo \@ifundefined NAT@b*@#2 \@firstoftwo @num @NAT@ctr \@secondoft...

  3. [3]

    1.0" encoding=

    @open @close @open @close and [1] URL: #1 \@ifundefined chapter * \@mkboth \@ifxundefined @sectionbib * \@mkboth * \@mkboth\@gobbletwo \@ifclassloaded amsart * \@ifclassloaded amsbook * \@ifxundefined @heading @heading NAT@ctr thebibliography [1] @ \@biblabel @NAT@ctr \@bibsetup #1 @NAT@ctr @ @openbib .11em \@plus.33em \@minus.07em 4000 4000 `\.\@m @bibit...

    2022

  4. [4]

    write newline

    " write newline "" before.all 'output.state := FUNCTION n.dashify 't := "" t empty not t #1 #1 substring "-" = t #1 #2 substring "--" = not "--" * t #2 global.max substring 't := t #1 #1 substring "-" = "-" * t #2 global.max substring 't := while if t #1 #1 substring * t #2 global.max substring 't := if while FUNCTION format.date year duplicate empty "emp...

  5. [5]

    Sharp davies--gaffney--grigor’yan lemma on graphs

    Bauer, F., Hua, B., and Yau, S.-T. Sharp davies--gaffney--grigor’yan lemma on graphs. Mathematische Annalen, 368 0 (3--4): 0 1429--1437, 2017. doi:10.1007/s00208-017-1529-z

    work page doi:10.1007/s00208-017-1529-z 2017

  6. [6]

    M., Grattarola, D., Livi, L

    Bianchi, F. M., Grattarola, D., Livi, L. F., and Alippi, C. Graph neural networks with convolutional arma filters. IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence, 44: 0 3496--3507, 2019

    2019

  7. [7]

    Blum, L. C. and Reymond, J.-L. 970 million druglike small molecules for virtual screening in the chemical universe database GDB-13 . J. Am. Chem. Soc., 131: 0 8732, 2009

    2009

  8. [8]

    How attentive are graph attention networks? In The Tenth International Conference on Learning Representations, ICLR 2022, Virtual Event, April 25-29, 2022

    Brody, S., Alon, U., and Yahav, E. How attentive are graph attention networks? In The Tenth International Conference on Learning Representations, ICLR 2022, Virtual Event, April 25-29, 2022 . OpenReview.net, 2022. URL https://openreview.net/forum?id=F72ximsx7C1

    2022

Show all 72 references
  1. [9]

    M., Bruna, J., Cohen, T., and Veličković, P

    Bronstein, M. M., Bruna, J., Cohen, T., and Veličković, P. Geometric deep learning: Grids, groups, graphs, geodesics, and gauges, 2021

    2021

  2. [10]

    Spectral networks and locally connected networks on graphs

    Bruna, J., Zaremba, W., Szlam, A., and Lecun, Y. Spectral networks and locally connected networks on graphs. In International Conference on Learning Representations (ICLR2014), CBLS, April 2014, 2014

    2014

  3. [11]

    Chung, F. R. K. Spectral Graph Theory. American Mathematical Society, 1997

    1997

  4. [12]

    Convolutional neural networks on graphs with fast localized spectral filtering

    Defferrard, M., Bresson, X., and Vandergheynst, P. Convolutional neural networks on graphs with fast localized spectral filtering. Advances in neural information processing systems, 29, 2016

    2016

  5. [13]

    and Lenssen, J

    Fey, M. and Lenssen, J. E. Fast graph representation learning with PyTorch Geometric . In ICLR Workshop on Representation Learning on Graphs and Manifolds, 2019

    2019

  6. [14]

    E., and Leskovec, J

    Fey, M., Sunil, J., Nitta, A., Puri, R., Shah, M., Stojanovič, B., Bendias, R., Barghi, A., Kocijan, V., Zhang, Z., He, X., Lenssen, J. E., and Leskovec, J. Pyg 2.0: Scalable learning on real world graphs. arXiv preprint arXiv:2507.16991, 2025. URL https://arxiv.org/abs/2507.16991

    2025

  7. [15]

    Diffusion scattering transforms on graphs

    Gama, F., Ribeiro, A., and Bruna, J. Diffusion scattering transforms on graphs. In 7th International Conference on Learning Representations, ICLR 2019, New Orleans, LA, USA, May 6-9, 2019 . OpenReview.net, 2019. URL https://openreview.net/forum?id=BygqBiRcFQ

    2019

  8. [16]

    Stability properties of graph neural networks

    Gama, F., Bruna, J., and Ribeiro, A. Stability properties of graph neural networks. IEEE Trans. Signal Process. , 68: 0 5680--5695, 2020. doi:10.1109/TSP.2020.3026980. URL https://doi.org/10.1109/TSP.2020.3026980

    2020 doi

  9. [17]

    Predict then propagate: Graph neural networks meet personalized pagerank

    Gasteiger, J., Bojchevski, A., and G \" u nnemann, S. Predict then propagate: Graph neural networks meet personalized pagerank. In 7th International Conference on Learning Representations, ICLR 2019, New Orleans, LA, USA, May 6-9, 2019 . OpenReview.net, 2019. URL https://openr...

    2019

  10. [18]

    S., Riley, P

    Gilmer, J., Schoenholz, S. S., Riley, P. F., Vinyals, O., and Dahl, G. E. Neural message passing for quantum chemistry. In International conference on machine learning, pp.\ 1263--1272. PMLR, 2017

    2017

  11. [19]

    L., Ying, Z., and Leskovec, J

    Hamilton, W. L., Ying, Z., and Leskovec, J. Inductive representation learning on large graphs. In Guyon, I., von Luxburg, U., Bengio, S., Wallach, H. M., Fergus, R., Vishwanathan, S. V. N., and Garnett, R. (eds.), Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 30: Annual Co...

    2017

  12. [20]

    Bernnet: Learning arbitrary graph spectral filters via bernstein approximation

    He, M., Wei, Z., Huang, Z., and Xu, H. Bernnet: Learning arbitrary graph spectral filters via bernstein approximation. In Ranzato, M., Beygelzimer, A., Dauphin, Y. N., Liang, P., and Vaughan, J. W. (eds.), Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 34: Annual Conference...

    2021

  13. [21]

    Convolutional neural networks on graphs with chebyshev approximation, revisited

    He, M., Wei, Z., and Wen, J. Convolutional neural networks on graphs with chebyshev approximation, revisited. In NeurIPS, 2022. URL http://papers.nips.cc/paper\_files/paper/2022/hash/2f9b3ee2bcea04b327c09d7e3145bd1e-Abstract-Conference.html

    2022

  14. [22]

    Graph laplacians and their convergence on random neighborhood graphs

    Hein, M., Audibert, J.-Y., and von Luxburg, U. Graph laplacians and their convergence on random neighborhood graphs. J. Mach. Learn. Res., 8: 0 1325--1368, 2006. URL https://api.semanticscholar.org/CorpusID:1355782

    2006

  15. [23]

    W., Laskey, K

    Holland, P. W., Laskey, K. B., and Leinhardt, S. Stochastic blockmodels: First steps. Social Networks, 5 0 (2): 0 109--137, 1983. ISSN 0378-8733. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/0378-8733(83)90021-7. URL https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/0378873383900217

    1983 doi

  16. [24]

    Horn, R. A. and Johnson, C. R. Matrix analysis. Cambridge university press, 2012

    2012

  17. [25]

    Strategies for pre-training graph neural networks

    Hu, W., Liu, B., Gomes, J., Zitnik, M., Liang, P., Pande, V., and Leskovec, J. Strategies for pre-training graph neural networks. In International Conference on Learning Representations (ICLR), 2020. doi:10.48550/arXiv.1905.12265. URL https://arxiv.org/abs/1905.12265

    2020 doi

  18. [26]

    Highly accurate protein structure prediction with alphafold

    Jumper, J., Evans, R., Pritzel, A., Green, T., Figurnov, M., Ronneberger, O., Tunyasuvunakool, K., Bates, R., Zidek, A., Potapenko, A., et al. Highly accurate protein structure prediction with alphafold. Nature, 596 0 (7873): 0 583--589, 2021. doi:10.1038/s41586-020-03085-1

    2021 doi

  19. [27]

    Perturbation theory for linear operators; 2nd ed

    Kato, T. Perturbation theory for linear operators; 2nd ed. Grundlehren der mathematischen Wissenschaften : a series of comprehensive studies in mathematics. Springer, Berlin, 1976. URL https://cds.cern.ch/record/101545

    1976

  20. [28]

    On the stability of graph convolutional neural networks under edge rewiring

    Kenlay, H., Thanou, D., and Dong, X. On the stability of graph convolutional neural networks under edge rewiring. In ICLR 2021 Workshop on Geometrical and Topological Representation Learning, 2021. URL https://openreview.net/forum?id=NG7Eb2_zR6K

    2021

  21. [29]

    Kipf, T. N. and Welling, M. Semi-supervised classification with graph convolutional networks. In 5th International Conference on Learning Representations, ICLR 2017, Toulon, France, April 24-26, 2017, Conference Track Proceedings . OpenReview.net, 2017. URL https://openreview....

    2017

  22. [30]

    Limitless stability for graph convolutional networks

    Koke, C. Limitless stability for graph convolutional networks. In 11th International Conference on Learning Representations, ICLR 2023, Kigali, Rwanda, May 1-5, 2023 . OpenReview.net, 2023. URL https://openreview.net/forum?id=XqcQhVUr2h0

    2023

  23. [31]

    Large coupling convergence beyond definiteness

    Koke, C. Large coupling convergence beyond definiteness. arXiv preprint arXiv:2601.18055, 2026 a . URL https://arxiv.org/abs/2601.18055

    2026

  24. [32]

    Di-graphs with tightly connected clusters: effective graph laplacians and resolvent convergence

    Koke, C. Di-graphs with tightly connected clusters: effective graph laplacians and resolvent convergence. arXiv preprint arXiv:2601.18057, 2026 b . URL https://arxiv.org/abs/2601.18057

    2026

  25. [33]

    and Cremers, D

    Koke, C. and Cremers, D. Holonets: Spectral convolutions do extend to directed graphs. In The Twelfth International Conference on Learning Representations, 2024. URL https://openreview.net/forum?id=EhmEwfavOW

    2024

  26. [34]

    and Kutyniok, G

    Koke, C. and Kutyniok, G. Graph scattering beyond wavelet shackles. In Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 35: Annual Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems 2022, NeurIPS 2020, November 28 - December 9, 2022, New Orleans, 2022. URL https://openreview...

    2022

  27. [35]

    Resolvnet: A graph convolutional network with multi-scale consistency

    Koke, C., Saroha, A., Shen, Y., Eisenberger, M., and Cremers, D. Resolvnet: A graph convolutional network with multi-scale consistency. In NeurIPS 2023 Workshop on New Frontiers in Graph Learning (GLFrontiers). OpenReview, October 2023. URL https://openreview.net/forum?id=V5eDwEDfXT

    2023

  28. [36]

    M., and Cremers, D

    Koke, C., Saroha, A., Shen, Y., Eisenberger, M., Bronstein, M. M., and Cremers, D. Transferability for graph convolutional networks. In ICML 2024 Workshop on Geometry-grounded Representation Learning and Generative Modeling, 2024. URL https://openreview.net/forum?id=rKEdfcaqYX

    2024

  29. [37]

    M., and Cremers, D

    Koke, C., Schnaus, D., Shen, Y., Saroha, A., Eisenberger, M., Rieck, B., Bronstein, M. M., and Cremers, D. On multi-scale graph representation learning. In Learning Meaningful Representations of Life (LMRL) Workshop at ICLR 2025, 2025 a . URL https://openreview.net/forum?id=X3OMHwfsxk

    2025

  30. [38]

    M., and Cremers, D

    Koke, C., Shen, Y., Saroha, A., Eisenberger, M., Rieck, B., Bronstein, M. M., and Cremers, D. Graph networks struggle with variable scale. In ICLR 2025 Workshop ICBINB. OpenReview, March 2025 b . URL https://openreview.net/forum?id=N5n6SAfnU0

    2025

  31. [39]

    M., and Cremers, D

    Koke, C., Shen, Y., Saroha, A., Eisenberger, M., Rieck, B., Bronstein, M. M., and Cremers, D. On incorporating scale into graph networks. In ICLR 2025 Workshop on Machine Learning for Multiscale Physics (MLMP). OpenReview, March 2025 c . URL https://openreview.net/forum?id=SRCsyJafgP

    2025

  32. [40]

    M., and Cremers, D

    Koke, C., Rieck, B., Bronstein, M. M., and Cremers, D. Scale continuity in graph learning: Going beyond spectral methods. In ICLR 2026 Workshop on Geometry-grounded Representation Learning and Generative Modeling, 2026. URL https://openreview.net/forum?id=RYl2VWfIRI

    2026

  33. [41]

    Learning skillful medium-range global weather forecasting

    Lam, R., Sanchez-Gonzalez, A., Willson, M., Wirnsberger, P., Fortunato, M., Alet, F., Ravuri, S., Ewalds, T., Eaton-Rosen, Z., Hu, W., Merose, A., Hoyer, S., Holland, G., Vinyals, O., Stott, J., Pritzel, A., Mohamed, S., and Battaglia, P. Learning skillful medium-range global ...

    2023 doi

  34. [42]

    and Jegelka, S

    Le, T. and Jegelka, S. Limits, approximation and size transferability for GNN s on sparse graphs via graphops. In Thirty-seventh Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems, 2023. URL https://openreview.net/forum?id=kDQwossJuI

    2023

  35. [43]

    Self-attention graph pooling

    Lee, J., Lee, I., and Kang, J. Self-attention graph pooling. In Chaudhuri, K. and Salakhutdinov, R. (eds.), Proceedings of the 36th International Conference on Machine Learning, volume 97 of Proceedings of Machine Learning Research, pp.\ 3734--3743. PMLR, 09--15 Jun 2019. URL ...

    2019

  36. [44]

    M., and Kutyniok, G

    Levie, R., Bronstein, M. M., and Kutyniok, G. Transferability of spectral graph convolutional neural networks. CoRR, abs/1907.12972, 2019 a . URL http://arxiv.org/abs/1907.12972

    1907

  37. [45]

    On the transferability of spectral graph filters

    Levie, R., Isufi, E., and Kutyniok, G. On the transferability of spectral graph filters. CoRR, abs/1901.10524, 2019 b . URL http://arxiv.org/abs/1901.10524

    1901 arXiv

  38. [46]

    Levie, R., Monti, F., Bresson, X., and Bronstein, M. M. Cayleynets: Graph convolutional neural networks with complex rational spectral filters. IEEE Trans. Signal Process. , 67 0 (1): 0 97--109, 2019 c . doi:10.1109/TSP.2018.2879624. URL https://doi.org/10.1109/TSP.2018.2879624

    2019 doi

  39. [47]

    Liao, R., Zhao, Z., Urtasun, R., and Zemel, R. S. Lanczosnet: Multi-scale deep graph convolutional networks. In 7th International Conference on Learning Representations, ICLR 2019, New Orleans, LA, USA, May 6-9, 2019 . OpenReview.net, 2019. URL https://openreview.net/forum?id=...

    2019

  40. [48]

    Graph reduction with spectral and cut guarantees

    Loukas, A. Graph reduction with spectral and cut guarantees. J. Mach. Learn. Res., 20: 0 116:1--116:42, 2019. URL https://jmlr.org/papers/v20/18-680.html

    2019

  41. [49]

    and Vandergheynst, P

    Loukas, A. and Vandergheynst, P. Spectrally approximating large graphs with smaller graphs. In Dy, J. G. and Krause, A. (eds.), Proceedings of the 35th International Conference on Machine Learning, ICML 2018, Stockholmsm \" a ssan, Stockholm, Sweden, July 10-15, 2018 , volume ...

    2018

  42. [50]

    and Vandergheynst, P

    Loukas, A. and Vandergheynst, P. Spectrally approximating large graphs with smaller graphs. In Dy, J. and Krause, A. (eds.), Proceedings of the 35th International Conference on Machine Learning, volume 80 of Proceedings of Machine Learning Research, pp.\ 3237--3246. PMLR, 10--...

    2018

  43. [51]

    Group invariant scattering

    Mallat, S. Group invariant scattering. Communications on Pure and Applied Mathematics, 65 0 (10): 0 1331--1398, 2012. doi:https://doi.org/10.1002/cpa.21413. URL https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/cpa.21413

    2012 doi

  44. [52]

    Transferability of graph neural networks: an extended graphon approach

    Maskey, S., Levie, R., and Kutyniok, G. Transferability of graph neural networks: an extended graphon approach. CoRR, abs/2109.10096, 2021. URL https://arxiv.org/abs/2109.10096

    2021

  45. [53]

    Automating the construction of internet portals with machine learning

    McCallum, A., Nigam, K., Rennie, J., and Seymore, K. Automating the construction of internet portals with machine learning. Inf. Retr., 3 0 (2): 0 127--163, 2000. doi:10.1023/A:1009953814988. URL https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1009953814988

    doi

  46. [54]

    Understanding graph neural networks with asymmetric geometric scattering transforms, 2019

    Perlmutter, M., Gao, F., Wolf, G., and Hirn, M. Understanding graph neural networks with asymmetric geometric scattering transforms, 2019. URL https://arxiv.org/abs/1911.06253

    2019

  47. [55]

    Spectral Analysis on Graph-like Spaces / by Olaf Post

    Post, O. Spectral Analysis on Graph-like Spaces / by Olaf Post. Lecture Notes in Mathematics, 2039. Springer Berlin Heidelberg, Berlin, Heidelberg, 1st ed. 2012. edition, 2012. ISBN 3-642-23840-8

  48. [56]

    C., Singh, A., Frey, N

    Price, C. C., Singh, A., Frey, N. C., and Shenoy, V. B. Efficient catalyst screening using graph neural networks to predict strain effects on adsorption energy. Science Advances, 8 0 (47): 0 eabq5944, 2022. doi:10.1126/sciadv.abq5944. URL https://www.science.org/doi/abs/10.112...

    2022 doi

  49. [57]

    M., Gama, F., Baraniuk, R

    Roddenberry, T. M., Gama, F., Baraniuk, R. G., and Segarra, S. On local distributions in graph signal processing. IEEE Trans. Signal Process. , 70: 0 5564--5577, 2022. doi:10.1109/TSP.2022.3223217. URL https://doi.org/10.1109/TSP.2022.3223217

    2022 doi

  50. [58]

    Ruiz, L., Chamon, L. F. O., and Ribeiro, A. Graphon neural networks and the transferability of graph neural networks. In Larochelle, H., Ranzato, M., Hadsell, R., Balcan, M., and Lin, H. (eds.), Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 33: Annual Conference on Neural ...

    2020

  51. [59]

    Rupp, M., Tkatchenko, A., M\"uller, K.-R., and von Lilienfeld, O. A. Fast and accurate modeling of molecular atomization energies with machine learning. Physical Review Letters, 108: 0 058301, 2012

    2012

  52. [60]

    C., Hagenbuchner, M., and Monfardini, G

    Scarselli, F., Gori, M., Tsoi, A. C., Hagenbuchner, M., and Monfardini, G. The graph neural network model. IEEE Transactions on Neural Networks, 20 0 (1): 0 61--80, 2009. doi:10.1109/TNN.2008.2005605

    2009 doi

  53. [61]

    Collective classification in network data

    Sen, P., Namata, G., Bilgic, M., Getoor, L., Galligher, B., and Eliassi-Rad, T. Collective classification in network data. AI Magazine, 29 0 (3): 0 93, Sep. 2008. doi:10.1609/aimag.v29i3.2157. URL https://ojs.aaai.org/index.php/aimagazine/article/view/2157

    2008 doi

  54. [62]

    An Introduction to Measure Theory

    Tao, T. An Introduction to Measure Theory. Graduate studies in mathematics. American Mathematical Society, 2013. ISBN 9781470409227. URL https://books.google.de/books?id=SPGJjwEACAAJ

    2013

  55. [63]

    Mathematical Methods in Quantum Mechanics

    Teschl, G. Mathematical Methods in Quantum Mechanics. American Mathematical Society, 2014

    2014

  56. [64]

    Graph attention networks

    Velickovic, P., Cucurull, G., Casanova, A., Romero, A., Li \` o , P., and Bengio, Y. Graph attention networks. In 6th International Conference on Learning Representations, ICLR 2018, Vancouver, BC, Canada, April 30 - May 3, 2018, Conference Track Proceedings . OpenReview.net, ...

    2018

  57. [65]

    Stability of neural networks on riemannian manifolds

    Wang, Z., Ruiz, L., and Ribeiro, A. Stability of neural networks on riemannian manifolds. 2021 29th European Signal Processing Conference (EUSIPCO), pp.\ 1845--1849, 2021. URL https://api.semanticscholar.org/CorpusID:232110514

    2021

  58. [66]

    Stability to deformations of manifold filters and manifold neural networks

    Wang, Z., Ruiz, L., and Ribeiro, A. Stability to deformations of manifold filters and manifold neural networks. IEEE Trans. Signal Process. , 72: 0 2130--2146, 2024 a . doi:10.1109/TSP.2024.3378379. URL https://doi.org/10.1109/TSP.2024.3378379

    2024 doi

  59. [67]

    Geometric graph filters and neural networks: Limit properties and discriminability trade-offs

    Wang, Z., Ruiz, L., and Ribeiro, A. Geometric graph filters and neural networks: Limit properties and discriminability trade-offs. IEEE Trans. Signal Process. , 72: 0 2244--2259, 2024 b . doi:10.1109/TSP.2024.3392360. URL https://doi.org/10.1109/TSP.2024.3392360

    2024 doi

  60. [68]

    On the hölder continuity of matrix functions for normal matrices

    Wihler, T. On the hölder continuity of matrix functions for normal matrices. Journal of inequalities in pure and applied mathematics, 10 0 (4), Dec 2009. ISSN 1443-5756. URL https://www.emis.de/journals/JIPAM/images/276_09_JIPAM/276_09_www.pdf

    2009

  61. [69]

    and Grossman, J

    Xie, T. and Grossman, J. C. Crystal graph convolutional neural networks for an accurate and interpretable prediction of material properties. Physical Review Letters, 120 0 (14): 0 145301, 2018. doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.120.145301

    2018 doi

  62. [70]

    How powerful are graph neural networks? In 7th International Conference on Learning Representations, ICLR 2019, New Orleans, LA, USA, May 6-9, 2019

    Xu, K., Hu, W., Leskovec, J., and Jegelka, S. How powerful are graph neural networks? In 7th International Conference on Learning Representations, ICLR 2019, New Orleans, LA, USA, May 6-9, 2019 . OpenReview.net, 2019. URL https://openreview.net/forum?id=ryGs6iA5Km

    2019

  63. [71]

    How framelets enhance graph neural networks

    Zheng, X., Zhou, B., Gao, J., Wang, Y., Li \' o , P., Li, M., and Mont \' u far, G. How framelets enhance graph neural networks. In Meila, M. and Zhang, T. (eds.), Proceedings of the 38th International Conference on Machine Learning, ICML 2021, 18-24 July 2021, Virtual Event ,...

    2021

  64. [72]

    and Lerman, G

    Zou, D. and Lerman, G. Graph convolutional neural networks via scattering. Applied and Computational Harmonic Analysis, 49 0 (3): 0 1046--1074, nov 2020. doi:10.1016/j.acha.2019.06.003. URL https://doi.org/10.1016

    2020 doi

Pith tools

Reviewed June 28, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.