Classic

PubMed

Node Classification PyG dataset page ↗PyG ↗

Structure

1Graphs
19,717Nodes
44,338Edges
3Classes
500Node Feature Dim
0.7924Homophily

Coverage

1254Results
1Variants
184Papers
Node classification on one citation graph, predicting one of three diabetes-related paper classes from TF-IDF features and citations. Evaluated by Accuracy.

Dataset details

Task

Citation network node classification (3 classes). The primary catalog metric is Accuracy.

Data

Citation network node classification (3 classes).

Features

The representation follows the cited PyG loader or benchmark release. Node and edge fields are dataset-specific; preprocessing, graph direction, and any feature normalization must be kept fixed when reproducing a result.

Splits and evaluation

The catalog records these protocols or variants: Planetoid split. Evaluation uses Accuracy (higher is better). Exact masks or folds must come from the cited release.

Quirks and pitfalls

The same short dataset name is used for incompatible processed artifacts and split protocols. Report the loader/version, directedness, feature preprocessing, and exact masks; transductive results should not be described as inductive.

Sources

Yang et al. 2016 fixed split.

SOTA Progression

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

Leaderboard

#ModelAccuracy ↑F1F1-macroF1-microInstabilityMa-F1Micro-F1Prediction Acc.UnfaithfulnessPaper
1
LGTL
0.9518 ± 0.0011
————————
2
MixHop (LO)
0.9513 ± 0.0038
————————
3
GraphSAGE (LO)
0.9511 ± 0.0036
————————
4
MLP (LO)
0.9505 ± 0.0036
————————
5
LLAGA-HO
0.9503 ± 0.0012
————————
6
LLAGA-ND
0.9503 ± 0.0014
————————
7
NodeFormer
0.9490 ± 0.0019
————————
8
PromptGFM
0.9465
————————
9
Flan-T5-large
0.9462 ± 0.0013
————————
10
GAGA
0.9462 ± 0.0020
————————
11
Flan-T5-base
0.9445 ± 0.0012
————————
12
TAPE
0.9431 ± 0.0015
————————
13
GCN (LO)
0.9396 ± 0.0030
————————
14
Llama-7b
0.9384 ± 0.0025
————————
15
InstructGLM
0.9384 ± 0.0015
————————
16
H2GCN
0.9361 ± 0.0013
————————
17
APPNP
0.9355 ± 0.0060
————————
18
GCN
0.9296 ± 0.0015
————————
19
GLEM
0.9257 ± 0.0020
————————
20
GAT
0.9233 ± 0.0018
————————
21
Policy-GNN
0.9210 ± 0.0220
————————
22
SSP
0.9178 ± 0.0116
————————
23
NE-ASGCN
0.9170 ± 0.0015
————————
24
JKNet
0.9160
————————
25
JKNet+DropEdge
0.9160
————————
26
TADropEdge-CDF
0.9150
————————
27
TADropEdge-GCN
0.9150
————————
28
Snowball-V3
0.9144 ± 0.0059
————————
29
ACM-Snowball-3
0.9140 ± 0.0040
————————
30
GCN-b
0.9130
————————
31
GCN-b+DropEdge
0.9130
————————
32
TADropEdge-Cutoff
0.9120
————————
33
TADropEdge-Division
0.9120
————————
34
TADropEdge-JKNet
0.9110
————————
35
TADropEdge-IncepGCN
0.9110
————————
36
ResGCN
0.9110
————————
37
ResGCN+DropEdge
0.9110
————————
38
N2N-TAPS-1 (JL)
0.9108 ± 0.0016
————————
39
contrastive loss
0.9104
————————
40
GCN+DropEdge
0.9100
————————
41
ACM-GCN
0.9096 ± 0.0062
————————
42
N2N
0.9092 ± 0.0009
————————
43
DropEdge
0.9090
————————
44
N2N-TAPS-4 (JL)
0.9078 ± 0.0007
————————
45
N2N-TAPS-5 (JL)
0.9078 ± 0.0020
————————
46
N2N-TAPS-2 (JL)
0.9076 ± 0.0014
————————
47
N2N-TAPS-3 (JL)
0.9074 ± 0.0005
————————
48
NE-SAGE
0.9070 ± 0.0098
————————
49
APPNP+DropEdge
0.9070
————————
50
origin-ASGCN
0.9060 ± 0.0016
————————
SOTA performance set a new SOTA at the time matched the SOTA at the time