A Quasi-Wasserstein Loss for Learning Graph Neural Networks
Abstract
When learning graph neural networks (GNNs) in node-level prediction tasks, most existing loss functions are applied for each node independently, even if node embeddings and their labels are non-i.i.d. because of their graph structures. To eliminate such inconsistency, in this study we propose a novel Quasi-Wasserstein (QW) loss with the help of the optimal transport defined on graphs, leading to new learning and prediction paradigms of GNNs. In particular, we design a ``Quasi-Wasserstein'' distance between the observed multi-dimensional node labels and their estimations, optimizing the label transport defined on graph edges. The estimations are parameterized by a GNN in which the optimal label transport may determine the graph edge weights optionally. By reformulating the strict constraint of the label transport to a Bregman divergence-based regularizer, we obtain the proposed Quasi-Wasserstein loss associated with two efficient solvers learning the GNN together with optimal label transport. When predicting node labels, our model combines the output of the GNN with the residual component provided by the optimal label transport, leading to a new transductive prediction paradigm. Experiments show that the proposed QW loss applies to various GNNs and helps to improve their performance in node-level classification and regression tasks. The code of this work can be found at.
Benchmark Results
Tested on 5 datasets 9 baseline values reported too low
Tables show presented results in global context (best 3 papers + GCN + MLP).
Classic
| # | Model | Accuracy ↑ | Paper |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | CNA | 0.9575
±0.0058 | |
| 2 | IS-GIB | 0.9390
±0.0187 | |
| 3 | EERM | 0.9112
±0.0145 | |
| 44 | GCN | 0.8033
±0.0088 | |
| 50 | ChebNetII | 0.8000
±0.0074 | This paper |
| 77 | GCN-LPA | 0.7851
±0.0122 | This paper |
| 350 | MLP | 0.7289
±0.0010 |
| # | Model | Accuracy ↑ | Paper |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | GraphTARIF | 0.9703
±0.0019 | |
| 2 | GAT | 0.9669
±0.0014 best reported | |
| 3 | GAT+T | 0.9660
±0.0007 | |
| 7 | SAGE | 0.9643
±0.0027 | |
| 8 | GCN | 0.9632
±0.0008 best reported | |
| 21 | APPNP | 0.9370
±0.0027 | |
| 47 | QW | 0.9525
±0.0025 | This paper |
| 56 | GraphSAGE | 0.9508
±0.0026 | prev best: Elastic Graph Neural Networks (ICML 2021) |
| 62 | ChebNetII | 0.9492
±0.0033 best reported | best today: Piecewise Constant Spectral Graph Neural Network (TMLR 2025) |
| 127 | BernNet | 0.9368
±0.0028 | prev best: LON-GNN: Spectral GNNs with Learnable Orthonormal Basis (2023) Improvement within reported uncertainty; not highlighted. |
| 328 | GIN | 0.9211
±0.0032 best reported | best at pub: Union Subgraph Neural Networks (AAAI 2023) |
| 390 | MLP | 0.9128
±0.0063 | |
| 490 | GCN + LPA | 0.8810
±0.0131 | This paper |
| # | Model | Accuracy ↑ | Paper |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | GraphTARIF | 0.9461
±0.0017 | |
| 2 | GCN | 0.9412
±0.0008 best reported | best at pub: Clarify Confused Nodes via Separated Learning (2023) |
| 3 | GAT | 0.9398
±0.0022 best reported | |
| 8 | SAGE | 0.9351
±0.0006 | |
| 46 | GraphSAGE | 0.8971
±0.0038 | prev best: Elastic Graph Neural Networks (ICML 2021) best today: Can TabPFN Compete with GNNs for Node Classification via Graph Tabularization? (LoG 2025) |
| 58 | APPNP | 0.9093
±0.0018 best reported | best at pub: Node-oriented Spectral Filtering for Graph Neural Networks (2022) |
| 76 | QW | 0.9043
±0.0022 | This paper |
| 180 | BernNet | 0.8861
±0.0041 best reported | best at pub: Node-oriented Spectral Filtering for Graph Neural Networks (2022) |
| 268 | ChebNetII | 0.8658
±0.0071 | This paper |
| 282 | GIN | 0.8626
±0.0056 best reported | best at pub: Union Subgraph Neural Networks (AAAI 2023) |
| 320 | MLP | 0.8463 | |
| 390 | GCN + LPA | 0.8248
±0.0069 | This paper |
Heterophilic Graphs
| # | Model | Accuracy ↑ | Paper |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | P^2GNN | 0.9672
±0.0147 | |
| 2 | DoG | 0.9660
±0.0210 | |
| 3 | GPF-plus | 0.9583
±0.0419 | |
| 16 | QW | 0.9393
±0.0098 | This paper |
| 22 | BernNet | 0.9328
±0.0148 | prev best: Convolutional Neural Networks on Graphs with Chebyshev Approximation, Revisited (NeurIPS 2022) Improvement within reported uncertainty; not highlighted. |
| 23 | ChebNetII | 0.9328
±0.0147 best reported | best at pub: Convolutional Neural Networks on Graphs with Chebyshev Approximation, Revisited (NeurIPS 2022) best today: Simplified PCNet with Robustness (2024) Difference within reported uncertainty; not counted as underperformance. |
| 34 | MLP | 0.9230
±0.0070 | |
| 46 | APPNP | 0.9131
±0.0197 | prev best: Node-oriented Spectral Filtering for Graph Neural Networks (2022) Improvement within reported uncertainty; not highlighted. |
| 53 | GraphSAGE | 0.9000
±0.0230 | prev best: Heterophily-Aware Graph Attention Network (2023) Improvement within reported uncertainty; not highlighted. |
| 189 | SAGE | 0.8269 | |
| 211 | GAT | 0.8000
±0.0311 | prev best: Restructuring Graphs for Higher Homophily via Adaptive Spectral Clustering (AAAI 2022) Improvement within reported uncertainty; not highlighted. |
| 257 | GCN | 0.7933
±0.0447 best reported | best at pub: Restructuring Graphs for Higher Homophily via Adaptive Spectral Clustering (AAAI 2022) best today: Graph Wave Networks (WWW 2025) Difference within reported uncertainty; not counted as underperformance. |
| 326 | GIN | 0.7460
±0.0080 best reported | best at pub: Unifying over-smoothing and over-squashing in graph neural networks: A physics informed approach and beyond (2023) best today: Design your own universe: a physics-informed agnostic method for enhancing graph neural networks (2024) Difference within reported uncertainty; not counted as underperformance. |
| # | Model | Accuracy ↑ | Paper |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | DiGGR | 0.4535
±0.0353 | |
| 2 | TRIGON | 0.4402
±0.0028 | |
| 3 | DoG | 0.4320
±0.0120 | |
| 21 | BernNet | 0.4179
±0.0101 best reported | best at pub: LON-GNN: Spectral GNNs with Learnable Orthonormal Basis (2023) best today: $P^2$GNN: Two Prototype Sets to boost GNN Performance (2026) Difference within reported uncertainty; not counted as underperformance. |
| 22 | ChebNetII | 0.4175
±0.0107 best reported | best at pub: Convolutional Neural Networks on Graphs with Chebyshev Approximation, Revisited (NeurIPS 2022) best today: Piecewise Constant Spectral Graph Neural Network (TMLR 2025) Difference within reported uncertainty; not counted as underperformance. |
| 29 | QW | 0.4137
±0.0067 | This paper |
| 41 | APPNP | 0.4046
±0.0064 | prev best: Feature Expansion for Graph Neural Networks (ICML 2023) |
| 42 | MLP | 0.4026
±0.0108 | |
| 68 | GraphSAGE | 0.3899
±0.0085 | prev best: Hierarchical Graph Transformer with Adaptive Node Sampling (NeurIPS 2022) Improvement within reported uncertainty; not highlighted. |
| 135 | GCN | 0.3690 best reported | best at pub: Beyond Low-frequency Information in Graph Convolutional Networks (AAAI 2021) |
| 182 | GAT | 0.3605
±0.0035 best reported | best at pub: Hierarchical Graph Transformer with Adaptive Node Sampling (NeurIPS 2022) Difference within reported uncertainty; not counted as underperformance. |
| 266 | GIN | 0.3410
±0.0030 best reported | best today: What Can We Learn From MIMO Graph Convolutions? (IJCAI 2025) Difference within reported uncertainty; not counted as underperformance. |
