Algorithmic Graph Tasks
Eccentricity
Structure
7,040Graphs
1Node Feature Dim
Coverage
23Results
1Variants
3Papers
- TANGO: Graph Neural Dynamics via Learned Energy and Tangential Flows TANGO: Graph Neural Dynamics via Learned Energy and Tangential Flows
- Message-Passing State-Space Models: Improving Graph Learning with Modern Sequence Modeling Message-Passing State-Space Models: Improving Graph Learning with Modern Sequence Modeling
- On Vanishing Gradients, Over-Smoothing, and Over-Squashing in GNNs: Bridging Recurrent and Graph Learning On Vanishing Gradients, Over-Smoothing, and Over-Squashing in GNNs: Bridging Recurrent and Graph Learning
Node regression on synthetic graphs, predicting each node’s maximum shortest-path distance to any other node. Uses synthetic topology plus task-specific source indicators or random node features. Evaluated by MSE.
Dataset details
Task
Graph eccentricity prediction — node-level task predicting max distance to any other node. The primary catalog metric is MSE.
Data
The release has 7,040 synthetic graphs with 25–35 nodes sampled from multiple graph generators: 5,120 train, 640 validation, and 1,280 test graphs.
Features
Synthetic graphs provide task-specific structural inputs such as a designated source. Targets are numeric node quantities computed by the reference algorithm; positional encodings or extra structural features are model additions.
Splits and evaluation
The fixed split is 5,120/640/1,280 graphs. The paper selects models by validation MSE and reports mean log10(MSE) over 20 runs; lower is better.
Quirks and pitfalls
Targets are deterministic functions of generated topology, so generator overlap and size range determine difficulty. Random splits test interpolation; claims about algorithmic generalization require held-out sizes or graph families.
Sources
SOTA Progression
new SOTA
matches SOTA at that time
other proposed result
other baseline result
Leaderboard
| # | Model | MSE ↓ | log10(MSE) | Paper |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | GCN-SSM + k-hop | -4.2652
±
0.1776 | — | |
| 2 | MP-SSM | -2.9724
±
0.0271 | — | |
| 3 | GCN-SSM + eig(Lambda) approx 1 | -2.2583
±
0.0085 | — | |
| 4 | GCN-SSM | -2.2446
±
0.0027 | — | |
| 5 | DRew-GCN | -2.1004
±
0.0256 | — | |
| 6 | DRew-GCN + delay | -2.0291
±
0.0240 | — | |
| 7 | PH-DGN | -0.9348
±
0.2097 | — | |
| 8 | SWAN | -0.0739
±
0.2190 | — | |
| 9 | ADGN | 0.4296
±
0.1003 | — | |
| 10 | A-DGN | 0.4296
±
0.1003 | — | |
| 11 | GPS | 0.6077
±
0.0282 | — | |
| 12 | GRAND | 0.6602
±
0.1393 | — | |
| 13 | GraphCON | 0.6833
±
0.0074 | — | |
| 14 | GCNII | 0.7640
±
0.0355 | — | |
| 15 | GraphSAGE | 0.7863
±
0.0207 | — | |
| 16 | GAT | 0.7909
±
0.0222 | — | |
| 17 | DGC | 0.8261
±
0.0032 | — | |
| 18 | GCN | 0.8468
±
0.0028 | — | |
| 19 | GIN | 0.9504
±
0.0007 | — | |
| 20 | SWAN | — log10(MSE)
-0.0739 | -0.0739 | |
| 21 | PH-DGN | — log10(MSE)
-0.9348 | -0.9348 | |
| 22 | TANGO-GatedGCN | — log10(MSE)
-1.7419 | -1.7419 | |
| 23 | TANGO-GPS | — log10(MSE)
-2.1455 | -2.1455 |
SOTA performance
set a new SOTA at the time
matched the SOTA at the time