Saved in:
| Main Authors: | , , , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Preprint |
| Published: |
2025
|
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://arxiv.org/abs/2508.20583 |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| _version_ | 1866912557703364608 |
|---|---|
| author | Petkar, Soham K, Hari Aakash Vempati, Anirudh Sinha, Akshit Kumarauguru, Ponnurangam Agarwal, Chirag |
| author_facet | Petkar, Soham K, Hari Aakash Vempati, Anirudh Sinha, Akshit Kumarauguru, Ponnurangam Agarwal, Chirag |
| contents | Developments in Graph-Language Models (GLMs) aim to integrate the structural reasoning capabilities of Graph Neural Networks (GNNs) with the semantic understanding of Large Language Models (LLMs). However, we demonstrate that current evaluation benchmarks for GLMs, which are primarily repurposed node-level classification datasets, are insufficient to assess multimodal reasoning. Our analysis reveals that strong performance on these benchmarks is achievable using unimodal information alone, suggesting that they do not necessitate graph-language integration. To address this evaluation gap, we introduce the CLEGR(Compositional Language-Graph Reasoning) benchmark, designed to evaluate multimodal reasoning at various complexity levels. Our benchmark employs a synthetic graph generation pipeline paired with questions that require joint reasoning over structure and textual semantics. We perform a thorough evaluation of representative GLM architectures and find that soft-prompted LLM baselines perform on par with GLMs that incorporate a full GNN backbone. This result calls into question the architectural necessity of incorporating graph structure into LLMs. We further show that GLMs exhibit significant performance degradation in tasks that require structural reasoning. These findings highlight limitations in the graph reasoning capabilities of current GLMs and provide a foundation for advancing the community toward explicit multimodal reasoning involving graph structure and language. |
| format | Preprint |
| id |
arxiv_https___arxiv_org_abs_2508_20583 |
| institution | arXiv |
| publishDate | 2025 |
| record_format | arxiv |
| spellingShingle | A Graph Talks, But Who's Listening? Rethinking Evaluations for Graph-Language Models Petkar, Soham K, Hari Aakash Vempati, Anirudh Sinha, Akshit Kumarauguru, Ponnurangam Agarwal, Chirag Computation and Language Artificial Intelligence Developments in Graph-Language Models (GLMs) aim to integrate the structural reasoning capabilities of Graph Neural Networks (GNNs) with the semantic understanding of Large Language Models (LLMs). However, we demonstrate that current evaluation benchmarks for GLMs, which are primarily repurposed node-level classification datasets, are insufficient to assess multimodal reasoning. Our analysis reveals that strong performance on these benchmarks is achievable using unimodal information alone, suggesting that they do not necessitate graph-language integration. To address this evaluation gap, we introduce the CLEGR(Compositional Language-Graph Reasoning) benchmark, designed to evaluate multimodal reasoning at various complexity levels. Our benchmark employs a synthetic graph generation pipeline paired with questions that require joint reasoning over structure and textual semantics. We perform a thorough evaluation of representative GLM architectures and find that soft-prompted LLM baselines perform on par with GLMs that incorporate a full GNN backbone. This result calls into question the architectural necessity of incorporating graph structure into LLMs. We further show that GLMs exhibit significant performance degradation in tasks that require structural reasoning. These findings highlight limitations in the graph reasoning capabilities of current GLMs and provide a foundation for advancing the community toward explicit multimodal reasoning involving graph structure and language. |
| title | A Graph Talks, But Who's Listening? Rethinking Evaluations for Graph-Language Models |
| topic | Computation and Language Artificial Intelligence |
| url | https://arxiv.org/abs/2508.20583 |