<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"><channel><title>How Powerful are Graph Neural Networks? · HackerPapers discussions</title><link>https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/1810.00826/</link><description>Collected HN comments and submissions linking this paper.</description><language>en</language><lastBuildDate>Mon, 02 Nov 2026 11:16:22 GMT</lastBuildDate><atom:link href="https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/1810.00826/feed.xml" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" /><item><title>How Powerful are Graph Neural Networks? — mentioned by Topolomancer</title><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23752079</link><guid isPermaLink="false">urn:hackerpapers:mention:1810.00826:23752079</guid><pubDate>Mon, 06 Jul 2020 20:00:15 GMT</pubDate><description>&lt;p&gt;Sure thing! For the GIN-ε (https://arxiv.org/pdf/1810.00826.pdf), for example, the authors report a classification accuracy of 75.9±3.8 on the PROTEINS data set (classical graph benchmark data set). If you run it with a cross-validation setup that is repeated to account for effects of chance, performance drops to 73.1±0.7. Notice the drop—the second accuracy value is at least within the standard deviation of the first one, but you can see that a different experimental setup shrinks the gains quite a lot... Same goes for different data sets. Since the gains are not super large for most papers…&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href="https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/1810.00826/"&gt;Paper and discussion history&lt;/a&gt;. A mention is not an endorsement.&lt;/p&gt;</description><category>cs.LG</category></item></channel></rss>
