Maya Bechler-Speicher

dblp:254/1652 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
5ranked-venue papers
3as first author
5since 2021 · last 2025
—ORCID · none

Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several

Artificial intelligence and machine learning · 5 · 3 first-author · 5 since 2021Graphics, computer vision, multimedia, augmented reality and games · 1 · 1 first-author · 1 since 2021

Expertise — from the expertise taxonomy: the topics of the expert's papers under the CCF categories. A weight counts papers with recency: 1 for a paper about the topic, 0.3 when the topic is its context, halved every five years.

Artificial intelligence
4 papers
Graph learning · 69% Trustworthy machine learning · 21% Learning theory · 10%
Theoretical computer science
1 paper
Graph algorithms and graph theory · 100%

Topics — the 9 heaviest of 11, each with the papers that count most for it

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Machine learning › Graph learning
graph neural network
1.732024
The Intelligible and Effective Graph Neural Additive Network · NeurIPS 2024
Graph Neural Networks Use Graphs When They Shouldn't · ICML 2024
TREE-G: Decision Trees Contesting Graph Neural Networks · AAAI 2024
Machine learning › Graph learning › graph neural network
expressive power
0.912025
Spectral Graph Neural Networks are Incomplete on Graphs with a Simple Spectrum · NeurIPS 2025
Machine learning › Graph learning › graph neural network
spectral graph neural network
0.912025
Spectral Graph Neural Networks are Incomplete on Graphs with a Simple Spectrum · NeurIPS 2025
Machine learning › Trustworthy machine learning › interpretability › explainable AI
additive models
0.812024
The Intelligible and Effective Graph Neural Additive Network · NeurIPS 2024
Machine learning › Learning theory › implicit bias
implicit bias of gradient descent
0.812024
Graph Neural Networks Use Graphs When They Shouldn't · ICML 2024
Machine learning › Trustworthy machine learning
interpretability
0.812024
The Intelligible and Effective Graph Neural Additive Network · NeurIPS 2024
Machine learning › Graph learning › graph neural network › trustworthy graph neural networks
interpretable graph neural network
0.812024
The Intelligible and Effective Graph Neural Additive Network · NeurIPS 2024
Graph algorithms and graph theory
graph isomorphism
0.312025
Spectral Graph Neural Networks are Incomplete on Graphs with a Simple Spectrum · NeurIPS 2025
Graph algorithms and graph theory › graph isomorphism
weisfeiler-leman algorithm
0.312025
Spectral Graph Neural Networks are Incomplete on Graphs with a Simple Spectrum · NeurIPS 2025

Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics

positional encoding · 1.7rotation-equivariant neural networks · 0.9rotation equivariant neural network · 0.9graph neural network · 0.8graph kernel · 0.8gradient descent analysis · 0.8generalized additive model · 0.8decision tree · 0.8
YearPublicationVenuePosition
2025 Spectral Graph Neural Networks are Incomplete on Graphs with a Simple Spectrum
abstract
Spectral features are widely incorporated within Graph Neural Networks (GNNs) to improve their expressive power, or their ability to distinguish among non-isomorphic graphs. One popular example is the usage of graph Laplacian eigenvectors for positional encoding in MPNNs and Graph Transformers. The expressive power of such Spectrally-enhanced GNNs (SGNNs) is usually evaluated via the $k$-WL graph isomorphism test hierarchy and homomorphism counting. Yet, these frameworks align poorly with the graph spectra, yielding limited insight into SGNNs' expressive power. In this paper, we leverage a well-studied paradigm of classifying graphs by their largest eigenvalue multiplicity to introduce an expressivity hierarchy for SGNNs. We then prove that many SGNNs are incomplete even on graphs with distinct eigenvalues. To mitigate this deficiency, we adapt rotation equivariant neural networks to the graph spectra setting, yielding equiEPNN, a novel SGNN that provably improves upon contemporary SGNNs' expressivity on simple spectrum graphs. We then demonstrate that equiEPNN achieves perfect eigenvector canonicalization on ZINC, and performs favorably on image classification on MNIST-Superpixel and graph property regression on ZINC, compared to leading spectral methods.
Snir Hordan, Maya Bechler-Speicher, Gur Lifshitz, Nadav Dym
NeurIPS2
2025 Depth-Width Tradeoffs for Transformers on Graph Tasks
abstract
Transformers have revolutionized the field of machine learning. In particular, they can be used to solve complex algorithmic problems, including graph-based tasks. In such algorithmic tasks a key question is what is the minimal size of a transformer that can implement the task. Recent work has begun to explore this problem for graph-based tasks, showing that for sub-linear embedding dimension (i.e., model width) logarithmic depth suffices. However, an open question, which we address here, is what happens if width is allowed to grow linearly, while depth is kept fixed. Here we analyze this setting, and provide the surprising result that with linear width, constant depth suffices for solving a host of graph-based problems. This suggests that a moderate increase in width can allow much shallower models, which are advantageous in terms of inference and train time. For other problems, we show that quadratic width is required. Our results demonstrate the complex and intriguing landscape of transformer implementations of graph-based algorithms. We empirically investigate these trade-offs between the relative powers of depth and width and find tasks where wider models have the same accuracy as deep models, while having much faster train and inference time due to parallelizable hardware.
Gilad Yehudai, Clayton Sanford, Maya Bechler-Speicher, Orr Fischer, Ran Gilad-Bachrach, Amir Globerson
NeurIPS3
2024 TREE-G: Decision Trees Contesting Graph Neural Networks
abstract
When dealing with tabular data, models based on decision trees are a popular choice due to their high accuracy on these data types, their ease of application, and explainability properties. However, when it comes to graph-structured data, it is not clear how to apply them effectively, in a way that in- corporates the topological information with the tabular data available on the vertices of the graph. To address this challenge, we introduce TREE-G. TREE-G modifies standard decision trees, by introducing a novel split function that is specialized for graph data. Not only does this split function incorporate the node features and the topological information, but it also uses a novel pointer mechanism that allows split nodes to use information computed in previous splits. Therefore, the split function adapts to the predictive task and the graph at hand. We analyze the theoretical properties of TREE-G and demonstrate its benefits empirically on multiple graph and vertex prediction benchmarks. In these experiments, TREE-G consistently outperforms other tree-based models and often outperforms other graph-learning algorithms such as Graph Neural Networks (GNNs) and Graph Kernels, sometimes by large margins. Moreover, TREE-Gs models and their predic tions can be explained and visualized.
Maya Bechler-Speicher, Amir Globerson, Ran Gilad-Bachrach
AAAI1
2024 Graph Neural Networks Use Graphs When They Shouldn't
abstract
Predictions over graphs play a crucial role in various domains, including social networks and medicine. Graph Neural Networks (GNNs) have emerged as the dominant approach for learning on graph data. Although a graph-structure is provided as input to the GNN, in some cases the best solution can be obtained by ignoring it. While GNNs have the ability to ignore the graph-structure in such cases, it is not clear that they will. In this work, we show that GNNs actually tend to overfit the given graph-structure in the sense that they use it even when a better solution can be obtained by ignoring it. We analyze the implicit bias of gradient-descent learning of GNNs and prove that when the ground truth function does not use the graphs, GNNs are not guaranteed to learn a solution that ignores the graph, even with infinite data. We examine this phenomenon with respect to different graph distributions and find that regular graphs are more robust to this overfitting. We also prove that within the family of regular graphs, GNNs are guaranteed to extrapolate when learning with gradient descent. Finally, based on our empirical and theoretical findings, we demonstrate on real-data how regular graphs can be leveraged to reduce graph overfitting and enhance performance.
Maya Bechler-Speicher, Ido Amos, Ran Gilad-Bachrach, Amir Globerson
ICML1
2024 The Intelligible and Effective Graph Neural Additive Network
abstract
Graph Neural Networks (GNNs) have emerged as the predominant approach for learning over graph-structured data. However, most GNNs operate as black-box models and require post-hoc explanations, which may not suffice in high-stakes scenarios where transparency is crucial. In this paper, we present a GNN that is interpretable by design. Our model, Graph Neural Additive Network (GNAN), is a novel extension of the interpretable class of Generalized Additive Models, and can be visualized and fully understood by humans. GNAN is designed to be fully interpretable, offering both global and local explanations at the feature and graph levels through direct visualization of the model. These visualizations describe exactly how the model uses the relationships between the target variable, the features, and the graph. We demonstrate the intelligibility of GNANs in a series of examples on different tasks and datasets. In addition, we show that the accuracy of GNAN is on par with black-box GNNs, making it suitable for critical applications where transparency is essential, alongside high accuracy.
Maya Bechler-Speicher, Amir Globerson, Ran Gilad-Bachrach
NeurIPS1