Clarify Confused Nodes via Separated Learning
Abstract
Graph neural networks (GNNs) have achieved remarkable advances in graph-oriented tasks. However, real-world graphs invariably contain a certain proportion of heterophilous nodes, challenging the homophily assumption of traditional GNNs and hindering their performance. Most existing studies continue to design generic models with shared weights between heterophilous and homophilous nodes. Despite the incorporation of high-order messages or multi-channel architectures, these efforts often fall short. A minority of studies attempt to train different node groups separately but suffer from inappropriate separation metrics and low efficiency. In this paper, we first propose a new metric, termed Neighborhood Confusion (NC), to facilitate a more reliable separation of nodes. We observe that node groups with different levels of NC values exhibit certain differences in intra-group accuracy and visualized embeddings. These pave the way for Neighborhood Confusion-guided Graph Convolutional Network (NCGCN), in which nodes are grouped by their NC values and accept intra-group weight sharing and message passing. Extensive experiments on both homophilous and heterophilous benchmarks demonstrate that our framework can effectively separate nodes and yield significant performance improvement compared to the latest methods. The source code is available in.
Benchmark Results
Tested on 4 datasets 4 baseline values reported too low
Tables show presented results in global context (best 3 papers + GCN + MLP).
Classic
| # | Model | Accuracy ↑ | Paper |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | GraphTARIF | 0.9703
±0.0019 | |
| 2 | GAT | 0.9421
±0.0057 | prev best: Node-oriented Spectral Filtering for Graph Neural Networks (2022) |
| 3 | GAT+T | 0.9660
±0.0007 | |
| 7 | SAGE | 0.9643
±0.0027 best reported | |
| 8 | GCN | 0.9394
±0.0047 | prev best: Node-oriented Spectral Filtering for Graph Neural Networks (2022) |
| 33 | GPRGNN | 0.9397
±0.0067 | prev best: Node-oriented Spectral Filtering for Graph Neural Networks (2022) best today: SignGT: Signed Attention-based Graph Transformer for Graph Representation Learning (2023) Improvement within reported uncertainty; not highlighted. |
| 34 | H2GCN | 0.9548
±0.0043 | This paper |
| 48 | GloGNN | 0.9517
±0.0029 best reported | |
| 56 | GraphSAGE | 0.9508
±0.0026 | |
| 58 | ACM-GCN | 0.9504
±0.0044 | This paper |
| 66 | FAGCN | 0.9489
±0.0048 | prev best: Node-oriented Spectral Filtering for Graph Neural Networks (2022) |
| 319 | WRGAT | 0.9223
±0.0064 | This paper |
| 390 | MLP | 0.9128
±0.0063 | prev best: Node-oriented Spectral Filtering for Graph Neural Networks (2022) |
| 405 | HOG | 0.9088
±0.0068 | This paper |
| 412 | SNGNN | 0.9079
±0.0259 | This paper |
| 431 | CPGNN | 0.9049
±0.0243 | This paper |
| 526 | GBKSage | 0.8161
±0.0805 | This paper |
| # | Model | Accuracy ↑ | Paper |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | GraphTARIF | 0.9461
±0.0017 | |
| 2 | GCN | 0.8972
±0.0043 | prev best: Learning on Attribute-Missing Graphs (2020) |
| 3 | GAT | 0.8974
±0.0047 | |
| 8 | SAGE | 0.9001
±0.0077 | prev best: Graph-less Neural Networks: Teaching Old MLPs New Tricks via Distillation (ICLR 2021) |
| 46 | GraphSAGE | 0.9120
±0.0029 | |
| 72 | GPRGNN | 0.8792
±0.0196 | prev best: Node-oriented Spectral Filtering for Graph Neural Networks (2022) Improvement within reported uncertainty; not highlighted. |
| 80 | ACM-GCN | 0.9031
±0.0039 | This paper |
| 114 | H2GCN | 0.8986
±0.0022 best reported | best today: Adaptive Tokenization: On the Hop-Overpriority Problem in Tokenized Graph Learning Models (2025) Difference within reported uncertainty; not counted as underperformance. |
| 126 | FAGCN | 0.8968
±0.0097 best reported | best at pub: Node-oriented Spectral Filtering for Graph Neural Networks (2022) |
| 152 | GloGNN | 0.8912
±0.0033 best reported | |
| 285 | WRGAT | 0.8613
±0.0076 | This paper |
| 320 | MLP | 0.8435
±0.0102 | prev best: Node-oriented Spectral Filtering for Graph Neural Networks (2022) |
| 369 | CPGNN | 0.8350
±0.0223 | This paper |
| 403 | HOG | 0.8207
±0.0131 | This paper |
| 416 | GBKSage | 0.8120
±0.0562 | This paper |
| # | Model | Accuracy ↑ | Paper |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | GrokFormer | 0.9831
±0.0018 | |
| 2 | PolyFormer | 0.9808
±0.0027 | |
| 3 | SGFormer | 0.9796
±0.0081 | |
| 6 | GAT | 0.9663
±0.0025 | prev best: SelfGNN: Self-supervised Graph Neural Networks without explicit negative sampling (WWW 2021) best today: GrokFormer: Graph Fourier Kolmogorov-Arnold Transformers (ICML 2024) |
| 7 | GPRGNN | 0.9777
±0.0015 | |
| 9 | GCN | 0.9774
±0.0035 best reported | best at pub: SelfGNN: Self-supervised Graph Neural Networks without explicit negative sampling (WWW 2021) best today: GrokFormer: Graph Fourier Kolmogorov-Arnold Transformers (ICML 2024) |
| 11 | H2GCN | 0.9764
±0.0050 | This paper |
| 12 | CPGNN | 0.9761
±0.0048 | This paper |
| 15 | GloGNN | 0.9754
±0.0053 | This paper |
| 17 | SAGE | 0.9739
±0.0018 | This paper |
| 19 | FAGCN | 0.9737
±0.0033 | This paper |
| 30 | ACM-GCN | 0.9709
±0.0020 | This paper |
| 43 | GraphSAGE | 0.9649
±0.0006 | |
| 58 | MLP | 0.9563
±0.0024 | prev best: Latent Graph Inference using Product Manifolds (ICLR 2022) |
