Generative and Contrastive Paradigms Are Complementary for Graph Self-Supervised Learning
Abstract
For graph self-supervised learning (GSSL), masked autoencoder (MAE) follows the generative paradigm and learns to reconstruct masked graph edges or node features. Contrastive Learning (CL) maximizes the similarity between augmented views of the same graph and is widely used for GSSL. However, MAE and CL are considered separately in existing works for GSSL. We observe that the MAE and CL paradigms are complementary and propose the graph contrastive masked autoencoder (GCMAE) framework to unify them. Specifically, by focusing on local edges or node features, MAE cannot capture global information of the graph and is sensitive to particular edges and features. On the contrary, CL excels in extracting global information because it considers the relation between graphs. As such, we equip GCMAE with an MAE branch and a CL branch, and the two branches share a common encoder, which allows the MAE branch to exploit the global information extracted by the CL branch. To force GCMAE to capture global graph structures, we train it to reconstruct the entire adjacency matrix instead of only the masked edges as in existing works. Moreover, a discrimination loss is proposed for feature reconstruction, which improves the disparity between node embeddings rather than reducing the reconstruction error to tackle the feature smoothing problem of MAE. We evaluate GCMAE on four popular graph tasks (i.e., node classification, node clustering, link prediction, and graph classification) and compare it with 14 state-of-the-art baselines. The results show that GCMAE consistently provides good accuracy across these tasks, and the maximum accuracy improvement is up to 3.2\
Benchmark Results
Tested on 6 datasets 18 baseline values reported too low Non-standard metric on 1 dataset
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 | |
| 35 | GAT | 0.8080
±0.0026 best reported | best at pub: Feature Expansion for Graph Neural Networks (ICML 2023) |
| 44 | GCN | 0.8033
±0.0088 best reported | best at pub: Gophormer: Ego-Graph Transformer for Node Classification (2021) |
| 61 | GraphSAGE | 0.7923
±0.0053 | |
| 66 | DGI | 0.7890
±0.0020 best reported | best at pub: Oversmoothing: A Nightmare for Graph Contrastive Learning? (2023) |
| 87 | MVGRL | 0.7808
±0.0006 best reported | |
| 120 | GCMAE | 0.7677
±0.0002 | This paper |
| 165 | CCA-SSG | 0.7540
±0.0100 best reported | best at pub: Oversmoothing: A Nightmare for Graph Contrastive Learning? (2023) |
| 177 | MaskGAE | 0.7510
±0.0007 | prev best: Leveraging Label Non-Uniformity for Node Classification in Graph Neural Networks (ICML 2023) |
| 198 | S2GAE | 0.7454
±0.0006 | This paper |
| 201 | GRACE | 0.7450
±0.0010 best reported | best at pub: Oversmoothing: A Nightmare for Graph Contrastive Learning? (2023) |
| 209 | GraphMAE | 0.7436 best reported | best today: Text-space Graph Foundation Models: Comprehensive Benchmarks and New Insights (NeurIPS 2024) |
| 328 | SEEGERA | 0.7300
±0.0080 best reported | best today: Discrepancy-Aware Graph Mask Auto-Encoder (KDD 2025) Difference within reported uncertainty; not counted as underperformance. |
| 350 | MLP | 0.7289
±0.0010 |
| # | Model | Accuracy ↑ | Paper |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | LGTL | 0.9518
±0.0011 | |
| 2 | MixHop (LO) | 0.9513
±0.0038 | |
| 3 | GraphSAGE (LO) | 0.9511
±0.0036 | |
| 18 | GCN | 0.9296
±0.0015 best reported | best at pub: Tackling Over-Smoothing for General Graph Convolutional Networks (2020) |
| 20 | GAT | 0.9233
±0.0018 best reported | best at pub: Tackling Over-Smoothing for General Graph Convolutional Networks (2020) |
| 116 | SAGE | 0.8881
±0.0015 | |
| 130 | GCMAE | 0.8851
±0.0018 | This paper |
| 136 | CCA-SSG | 0.8840
±0.0060 best reported | best at pub: Oversmoothing: A Nightmare for Graph Contrastive Learning? (2023) |
| 187 | MaskGAE | 0.8633
±0.0026 | |
| 194 | GRACE | 0.8730
±0.0010 best reported | best at pub: Oversmoothing: A Nightmare for Graph Contrastive Learning? (2023) |
| 196 | MVGRL | 0.8725
±0.0012 best reported | |
| 204 | DGI | 0.8708
±0.0017 best reported | |
| 210 | MLP | 0.8690
±0.0074 | |
| 216 | S2GAE | 0.8679
±0.0022 | This paper |
| 232 | GraphMAE | 0.8594
±0.0016 best reported | |
| 300 | SEEGERA | 0.8301
±0.0032 | This paper |
Sorted by Accuracy. Highlighted rows are from other papers.
| # | Model | Accuracy ↑ | Paper |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | GAP-EDP | 0.9870
±0.0003 | |
| 2 | NE-ASGCN | 0.9758
±0.0027 | |
| 3 | HSGT | 0.9730
±0.0024 | |
| 4 | GCMAE | 0.9713
±0.0017 | This paper |
| 21 | GraphSAGE | 0.9653
±0.0011 | |
| 22 | GAT | 0.9650
±0.0011 best reported | best at pub: Hierarchical Transformer for Scalable Graph Learning (IJCAI 2023) best today: A Scalable and Effective Alternative to Graph Transformers (AAAI 2024) |
| 26 | GCN | 0.9648 best reported | best at pub: DropEdge: Towards Deep Graph Convolutional Networks on Node Classification (ICLR 2019) |
| 42 | GraphMAE | 0.9601
±0.0008 | prev best: Graph Representation Learning via Aggregation Enhancement (2022) Improvement within reported uncertainty; not highlighted. |
| 49 | SEEGERA | 0.9566
±0.0030 | This paper |
| 58 | S2GAE | 0.9527
±0.0021 | This paper |
| 65 | MaskGAE | 0.9517
±0.0021 | This paper |
| 67 | CCA-SSG | 0.9507
±0.0002 | This paper |
| 74 | GRACE | 0.9472
±0.0004 | prev best: Graph Representation Learning via Aggregation Enhancement (2022) |
| 77 | DGI | 0.9403
±0.0010 | prev best: Graph Representation Learning via Aggregation Enhancement (2022) Improvement within reported uncertainty; not highlighted. |
| 147 | MLP | 0.8240
±0.0010 |
TU Dortmund
| # | Model | Accuracy ↑ | Paper |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | MSH-GNN | 0.9910
±0.0030 | |
| 2 | ID-GNN+BEC | 0.9830
±0.0360 | |
| 3 | SupCosine | 0.9830
±0.0250 | |
| 39 | GIN | 0.9330
±0.0290 | |
| 102 | GCMAE | 0.9130
±0.0060 best reported | best today: CORE: Contrastive Masked Feature Reconstruction on Graphs (2025) Difference within reported uncertainty; not counted as underperformance. |
| 105 | InfoGCL | 0.9120
±0.0130 | This paper |
| 199 | MVGRL | 0.8993
±0.0616 best reported | best at pub: Improving Expressivity of GNNs with Subgraph-specific Factor Embedded Normalization (KDD 2023) Difference within reported uncertainty; not counted as underperformance. |
| 257 | InfoGraph | 0.8930
±0.0514 best reported | best at pub: Improving Expressivity of GNNs with Subgraph-specific Factor Embedded Normalization (KDD 2023) Difference within reported uncertainty; not counted as underperformance. |
| 258 | GraphMAE | 0.8930
±0.0110 best reported | best at pub: GraphMAE: Self-Supervised Masked Graph Autoencoders (KDD 2022) best today: Revisiting Graph Autoencoders as Implicit Contrastive Learners (KDD 2024) Difference within reported uncertainty; not counted as underperformance. |
| 266 | S2GAE | 0.8927
±0.0153 best reported | best today: Explainable Graph Representation Learning via Graph Pattern Analysis (IJCAI 2025) Difference within reported uncertainty; not counted as underperformance. |
| 351 | JOAO | 0.8770
±0.0080 best reported | best at pub: Graph Self-Supervised Learning: A Survey (2021) best today: Learning Graph Augmentations to Learn Graph Representations (2022) Difference within reported uncertainty; not counted as underperformance. |
| 354 | GraphCL | 0.8766
±0.0103 best reported | best at pub: Graph Masked Autoencoders with Transformers (2022) Difference within reported uncertainty; not counted as underperformance. |
| 403 | MLP | 0.8660
±0.0495 |
| # | Model | Accuracy ↑ | Paper |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | WL-MLP | 0.9954 | |
| 2 | GIN | 0.9934 | |
| 3 | GCN | 0.9727 | |
| 104 | GraphCL | 0.8250
±0.0013 best reported | best at pub: Label-invariant Augmentation for Semi-Supervised Graph Classification (NeurIPS 2022) |
| 112 | S2GAE | 0.8237
±0.0224 best reported | best today: Explainable Graph Representation Learning via Graph Pattern Analysis (IJCAI 2025) Difference within reported uncertainty; not counted as underperformance. |
| 131 | GraphSAGE | 0.8200
±0.0100 | |
| 155 | GCMAE | 0.8142
±0.0030 | This paper |
| 200 | GraphMAE | 0.8042
±0.0035 best reported | best at pub: GraphMAE: Self-Supervised Masked Graph Autoencoders (KDD 2022) best today: Self-Supervised Graph Learning via Spectral Bootstrapping and Laplacian-Based Augmentations (2025) Difference within reported uncertainty; not counted as underperformance. |
| 215 | InfoGCL | 0.8020
±0.0060 | This paper |
| 301 | JOAO | 0.7840
±0.0050 best reported | best at pub: Omni-Granular Ego-Semantic Propagation for Self-Supervised Graph Representation Learning (ICML 2022) Difference within reported uncertainty; not counted as underperformance. |
| 338 | InfoGraph | 0.7750
±0.0074 best reported | best at pub: Graph Masked Autoencoders with Transformers (2022) Difference within reported uncertainty; not counted as underperformance. |
| # | Model | Accuracy ↑ | Paper |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | WL-MLP | 0.9792 | |
| 2 | MSH-GNN | 0.9640
±0.0070 | |
| 3 | CoCN | 0.8722
±0.0013 | |
| 22 | GraphMAE | 0.8270
±0.0100 best reported | best at pub: GraphMAE: Self-Supervised Masked Graph Autoencoders (KDD 2022) best today: Revisiting Graph Autoencoders as Implicit Contrastive Learners (KDD 2024) |
| 23 | GCN | 0.8260
±0.0220 | |
| 27 | S2GAE | 0.8235
±0.0234 best reported | best today: Explainable Graph Representation Learning via Graph Pattern Analysis (IJCAI 2025) Difference within reported uncertainty; not counted as underperformance. |
| 68 | GCMAE | 0.8132
±0.0032 | This paper |
| 80 | GraphCL | 0.8108
±0.0017 best reported | best at pub: Label-invariant Augmentation for Semi-Supervised Graph Classification (NeurIPS 2022) |
| 126 | InfoGCL | 0.8001
±0.0132 best reported | best at pub: InfoGCL: Information-Aware Graph Contrastive Learning (NeurIPS 2021) best today: Self-Supervised Graph Learning via Spectral Bootstrapping and Laplacian-Based Augmentations (2025) Difference within reported uncertainty; not counted as underperformance. |
| 146 | InfoGraph | 0.7940 best reported | best at pub: CogDL: A Comprehensive Library for Graph Deep Learning (WWW 2021) |
| 151 | MLP | 0.7920
±0.0240 | |
| 248 | JOAO | 0.7535
±0.0093 best reported | best at pub: Spectral Augmentation for Self-Supervised Learning on Graphs (ICLR 2022) |
