Search papers, labs, and topics across Lattice.
This survey systematically analyzes the application of graph neural networks (GNNs) across twelve diverse domains, revealing insights into where graph structures justify their computational costs. By deriving spectral and spatial formulations from first principles, the authors connect expressive power to the Weisfeiler-Leman hierarchy, providing clarity on the limitations of current architectures. Key findings highlight recurring challenges such as heterophily and scale, which undermine model performance across various applications, and the disconnect between leaderboard success and real-world deployment.
GNNs face universal challenges across domains, with heterophily and scale consistently undermining model effectiveness, regardless of architecture.
Graph neural networks have moved from a niche representation-learning technique to the default model class wherever data carry relational structure. The interesting question is no longer whether message passing helps on a given dataset, but where graph structure earns its computational cost and where it does not. This survey organises the field around a single design space, derives the spectral and spatial formulations from shared first principles, and connects expressive power to the Weisfeiler-Leman hierarchy with explicit statements of what current architectures can and cannot separate. Against that methodological backbone we examine twelve application domains, among them recommendation and social networks, knowledge graphs and language-model integration, drug discovery and molecular property learning, healthcare and neuroscience, computer vision, traffic and urban computing, power and renewable-energy systems, wireless and sixth-generation networks, fraud and cybersecurity, industrial prognostics, materials science, and climate modelling. For each domain we specify the graph-construction choices and their costs, identify which architecture families dominate and why, and separate reported gains from artefacts of weak baselines or favourable splits. A cross-domain comparison exposes recurring patterns: heterophily and scale undercut the same models almost everywhere, temporal graphs remain harder than their static counterparts, and the architectures that top public leaderboards are seldom the ones that reach deployment. We treat over-smoothing, over-squashing, robustness, distribution shift, fairness, and explainability not as a closing checklist but as the constraints that decide adoption.
