Imagine you're mixing paint colors. You know the target shade (your prediction), but your hand wobbles — sometimes more red, sometimes more blue. Most uncertainty methods try to measure the wobble by mixing separate batches and comparing. DSS-GNN instead mathematically describes the full space of possible wobbles in one formula, using two independent spectral axes: one for graph structure (which neighbor influences which) and one for latent randomness (how much the representation could vary). The result is a single representation that simultaneously tells you what the model predicts, how confident it is, and whether the input is from a familiar distribution. The committed claim: a unified uncertainty representation for GNNs, built from graph-Fourier filtering crossed with scalar polynomial chaos expansion, that provides task-matched readouts for calibration, OOD detection, and distribution-shift robustness from one model. This is not the first attempt at uncertainty-aware GNNs — GKDE, GPN, G-ΔUQ, and others exist — but it is the first to unify all three uncertainty tasks within a single spectral representation with a supporting approximation theorem. The architecture is a doubly-spectral stochastic expansion. The first spectral axis applies graph Fourier filters (spectral GNN territory — think ChebNet, GCN) to capture structural variation across the graph Laplacian eigenbasis. The second axis uses an orthogonal polynomial chaos expansion — a classical technique from stochastic finite elements — to parameterize latent randomness as a one-dimensional coordinate. The mean chaos coefficient feeds an energy-based OOD score; higher-order coefficients encode structured logit variation for calibration; quadrature integration over the chaos coordinate gives the predictive distribution. Two deployment modes exist: standalone DSS-GNN and DSS-Hybrid, which bolts the stochastic branch onto a frozen deterministic encoder. On the ladder: standalone DSS-GNN achieves the lowest Brier score among compared uncertainty-aware baselines on all 14 node classification benchmarks — no post-hoc correction needed. DSS-Hybrid takes best AUROC on most node-level OOD settings, competitive cross-graph OOD detection, and strongest shifted accuracy on all 7 GOOD concept-shift benchmarks under standard ERM. The baselines named include GKDE, GPN, and G-ΔUQ — these are current-generation uncertainty GNN methods, not strawmen. The paper also cross-evaluates both modes on all three tasks and documents where each mode falls short, which is unusually disciplined. The theoretical contribution is a capacity theorem: under a full-rank feature assumption, a restricted DSS subfamily can match the chaos coefficients of any Gaussian-latent random graph signal, with exponentially decaying truncation error under a growth condition. This gives the representation formal expressiveness guarantees, though the task-level claims (calibration, OOD, robustness) remain empirical. Integrity is solid for a NeurIPS 2026 acceptance. Fourteen benchmarks for calibration, multiple OOD settings, and all seven GOOD shift benchmarks is a broad evaluation surface. The cross-evaluation between modes with documented exceptions is a good-faith move — most papers would quietly pick the mode that wins each task. The main integrity gap is the absence of independent replication and no pre-registration, which is standard for the venue but still a flag. The obvious successor experiment the authors didn't run: scaling to large heterogeneous graphs (heterophilic or million-node scale) and testing whether the polynomial chaos expansion's one-dimensional stochastic coordinate remains sufficient when the latent uncertainty is genuinely multimodal. The honest read is (a) compute and scope — the paper already covers 14+7+multiple OOD benchmarks, and adding large-scale heterogeneous experiments would be a second paper — and possibly (c) saving it for follow-up, since the theoretical framework naturally extends to multi-dimensional chaos coordinates.
