Classic

Cora

Node Classification PyG dataset page ↗PyG ↗

Structure

1Graphs
2,708Nodes
5,429Edges
7Classes
1433Node Feature Dim
0.8252Homophily

Coverage

1233Results
1Variants
198Papers
Node classification Predict one of seven research-topic labels for every paper in a single citation network. Evaluated by Accuracy.

Dataset details

Task

Predict one of seven research-topic labels for every paper in a single citation network. The standard Planetoid formulation is transductive, so the features and graph position of validation and test nodes are available during training while their labels are withheld.

Data

The commonly used Planetoid version contains 2,708 machine-learning papers connected by citation links. It is a processed subset of the larger Cora research-paper collection; other datasets called Cora, including citation-matching corpora and Cora-ML, are not interchangeable with it.

Features

Each paper has a sparse 1,433-dimensional binary bag-of-words vector indicating selected vocabulary terms. PyG exposes 10,556 directed edge entries after processing the citation relations and reports seven classes.

Splits and evaluation

The fixed public Planetoid split uses 20 labeled training nodes per class, 500 validation nodes, and 1,000 test nodes. Other common protocols include full-label, random, Geom-GCN, and cross-validation splits; their accuracy values should not be pooled with the public split.

Quirks and pitfalls

Cora is small, highly reused, and sensitive to the exact preprocessing and split. Published work sometimes reports results for Cora-ML or a random split simply as Cora. The OGB benchmark paper also reports feature-label leakage and duplicate-node concerns in this processed dataset, reinforcing the need to state the loader and split precisely rather than treating all Cora results as comparable.

Sources

Yang et al. 2016 fixed 20-per-class train split.

SOTA Progression

new SOTA matches SOTA at that time other proposed result other baseline result

Leaderboard

#ModelAccuracy ↑AUCAccuracy (micro F1 per L1108)F1F1-macroF1-microLossNMIPaper
1
GraphSAGE+CNA
0.9418 ± 0.0033
———————
2
GCN+CNA
0.9366 ± 0.0048
———————
3
TransformerConv
0.9350 ± 0.0058
———————
4
GAT + CNA
0.9294 ± 0.0071
———————
5
PromptGFM
0.9242
———————
6
Policy-GNN
0.9190 ± 0.0140
———————
7
RGCN + RSE (70b)
0.9177 ± 0.0038
———————
8
GraphSAGE_(Llama3)
0.9170 ± 0.0051
———————
9
GAT_(Llama3)
0.9151 ± 0.0035
———————
10
LinguGraph-Llama3 (8B)
0.9151 ± 0.0046
———————
11
ENGINE
0.9148 ± 0.0032
———————
12
SeHGNN + RSE (8b)
0.9138 ± 0.0050
———————
13
GIN_(Llama3)
0.9133 ± 0.0028
———————
14
TAPE
0.9119 ± 0.0012
———————
15
Flan-T5-base
0.9077 ± 0.0052
———————
16
GCN_(Llama3)
0.9077 ± 0.0028
———————
17
InstructGLM
0.9077
———————
18
GA
0.9065
———————
19
HAN + RSE (70b)
0.9031 ± 0.0038
———————
20
GCN
0.9004
———————
21
RDGNN-I
0.8991 ± 0.0110
———————
22
PDNAS-4
0.8980 ± 0.0030
———————
23
LPGNAS
0.8980 ± 0.0000
———————
24
ACM-GCN
0.8975
———————
25
GAGA
0.8967 ± 0.0012
———————
26
Snowball-V3
0.8959 ± 0.0158
———————
27
ACM-Snowball-3
0.8959
———————
28
RDGNN-S
0.8953 ± 0.0122
———————
29
UniMP + RSE (70b)
0.8952 ± 0.0041
———————
30
SplineCNN
0.8948 ± 0.0031
———————
31
ADR-GNN_S
0.8943
———————
32
PDNAS-2
0.8930 ± 0.0010
———————
33
PDNAS-3
0.8930 ± 0.0010
———————
34
TAPE
0.8930
———————
35
LGTL
0.8930 ± 0.0009
———————
36
CPF
0.8928 ± 0.0070
———————
37
LLAGA-HO
0.8922 ± 0.0010
———————
38
TFGNN
0.8921 ± 0.0040
———————
39
RevGAT
0.8911 ± 0.0000
———————
40
SAGE
0.8911 ± 0.0012
———————
41
APPNP+DropEdge
0.8910
———————
42
C&S
0.8905
———————
43
DropEdge
0.8900
———————
44
Flan-T5-large
0.8893 ± 0.0106
———————
45
TADropEdge-IncepGCN
0.8890
———————
46
GAT
0.8890 ± 0.0000
———————
47
GCN (LCP)
0.8890 ± 0.0100
———————
48
LLAGA-ND
0.8886 ± 0.0013
———————
49
FAGCN
0.8885 ± 0.0136
———————
50
Ortho-GCNII
0.8881
———————
SOTA performance set a new SOTA at the time matched the SOTA at the time