When Graph Neural Networks Meet Dynamic Mode Decomposition
Abstract
Graph Neural Networks (GNNs) have emerged as fundamental tools for a wide range of prediction tasks on graph-structured data. Recent studies have drawn analogies between GNN feature propagation and diffusion processes, which can be interpreted as dynamical systems. In this paper, we delve deeper into this perspective by connecting the dynamics in GNNs to modern Koopman theory and its numerical method, Dynamic Mode Decomposition (DMD). We illustrate how DMD can estimate a low-rank, finite-dimensional linear operator based on multiple states of the system, effectively approximating potential nonlinear interactions between nodes in the graph. This approach allows us to capture complex dynamics within the graph accurately and efficiently. We theoretically establish a connection between the DMD-estimated operator and the original dynamic operator between system states. Building upon this foundation, we introduce a family of DMD-GNN models that effectively leverage the low-rank eigenfunctions provided by the DMD algorithm. We further discuss the potential of enhancing our approach by incorporating domain-specific constraints such as symmetry into the DMD computation, allowing the corresponding GNN models to respect known physical properties of the underlying system. Our work paves the path for applying advanced dynamical system analysis tools via GNNs. We validate our approach through extensive experiments on various learning tasks, including directed graphs, large-scale graphs, long-range interactions, and spatial-temporal graphs. We also empirically verify that our proposed models can serve as powerful encoders for link prediction tasks. The results demonstrate that our DMD-enhanced GNNs achieve state-of-the-art performance, highlighting the effectiveness of integrating DMD into GNN frameworks.
Benchmark Results
Tested on 8 datasets 9 baseline values reported too low
Tables show presented results in global context (best 3 papers + GCN + MLP).
Classic
| # | Model | Accuracy ↑ | Paper |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | GraphSAGE+CNA | 0.9418
±0.0033 | |
| 2 | GCN+CNA | 0.9366
±0.0048 | |
| 3 | TransformerConv | 0.9350
±0.0058 | |
| 21 | GCN | 0.9004 best reported | best at pub: Understanding Heterophily for Graph Neural Networks (ICML 2024) |
| 39 | SAGE | 0.8911
±0.0012 best reported | best at pub: Efficient Tuning and Inference for Large Language Models on Textual Graphs (IJCAI 2024) best today: Efficient Text-Attributed Graph Learning through Selective Annotation and Graph Alignment (TMLR 2025) |
| 141 | GraphSAGE | 0.8708
±0.0085 | |
| 298 | DMD-SGC | 0.8410
±0.0040 | This paper |
| 398 | Framelets | 0.8330
±0.0050 | This paper |
| 437 | DMD-ACMP | 0.8290
±0.0090 | This paper |
| 464 | DMD-GCN | 0.8260
±0.0070 | This paper |
| 497 | DMD++ | 0.8230
±0.0030 | This paper |
| 724 | MLP | 0.7768 best reported | best at pub: Understanding Heterophily for Graph Neural Networks (ICML 2024) |
| # | 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 | |
| 259 | SAGE | 0.7361
±0.0190 best reported | best at pub: Efficient Tuning and Inference for Large Language Models on Textual Graphs (IJCAI 2024) |
| 310 | DMD++ | 0.7320
±0.0040 | This paper |
| 333 | DMD-ACMP | 0.7300
±0.0210 | This paper |
| 350 | MLP | 0.7289
±0.0010 | |
| 382 | DMD-SGC | 0.7260
±0.0080 | This paper |
| 523 | DMD-GCN | 0.7140
±0.0260 | This paper |
| 561 | Framelets | 0.7100
±0.0060 | This paper |
| # | 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: Node Identifiers: Compact, Discrete Representations for Efficient Graph Learning (ICLR 2024) |
| 116 | SAGE | 0.8881
±0.0015 best reported | best at pub: Marginal Nodes Matter: Towards Structure Fairness in Graphs (KDD 2023) best today: Efficient Text-Attributed Graph Learning through Selective Annotation and Graph Alignment (TMLR 2025) |
| 125 | GraphSAGE | 0.8864
±0.0030 | |
| 210 | MLP | 0.8690
±0.0074 best reported | best at pub: On the Equivalence of Graph Convolution and Mixup (TMLR 2023) |
| 363 | DMD-ACMP | 0.8120
±0.0150 | This paper |
| 468 | DMD++ | 0.7990
±0.0070 | This paper |
| 538 | Framelets | 0.7940
±0.0040 | This paper |
| 539 | DMD-SGC | 0.7940
±0.0140 | This paper |
| 551 | DMD-GCN | 0.7930
±0.0090 | 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 | |
| 28 | GPRGNN | 0.9295
±0.0131 best reported | best at pub: Node-oriented Spectral Filtering for Graph Neural Networks (2022) best today: GrokFormer: Graph Fourier Kolmogorov-Arnold Transformers (ICML 2024) |
| 31 | DMD++ | 0.9260
±0.0340 | This paper |
| 34 | MLP | 0.9230
±0.0070 | |
| 40 | H2GCN | 0.9189
±0.0393 best reported | best at pub: Global-Local Graph Neural Networks for Node-Classification (2024) best today: GrokFormer: Graph Fourier Kolmogorov-Arnold Transformers (ICML 2024) Difference within reported uncertainty; not counted as underperformance. |
| 53 | GraphSAGE | 0.9000
±0.0365 | |
| 66 | DMD-ACMP | 0.8940
±0.0380 | This paper |
| 165 | DMD-GCN | 0.8420
±0.0260 | This paper |
| 189 | SAGE | 0.7930
±0.0120 | best today: Language Models as Messengers: Enhancing Message Passing in Heterophilic Graph Learning (2025) Improvement within reported uncertainty; not highlighted. |
| 199 | Framelets | 0.8230
±0.0250 | This paper |
| 217 | GRAND | 0.8140
±0.0350 | prev best: Unifying over-smoothing and over-squashing in graph neural networks: A physics informed approach and beyond (2023) Improvement within reported uncertainty; not highlighted. |
| 223 | DMD-SGC | 0.8120
±0.0250 | This paper |
| # | Model | Accuracy ↑ | Paper |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | P^2GNN | 0.9541
±0.0272 | |
| 2 | ACM-GCN | 0.9480
±0.0380 | |
| 3 | RF-GCN | 0.9429 | |
| 21 | APPNP | 0.9181
±0.0196 best reported | best at pub: LON-GNN: Spectral GNNs with Learnable Orthonormal Basis (2023) Difference within reported uncertainty; not counted as underperformance. |
| 23 | DMD++ | 0.9140
±0.0170 | This paper |
| 24 | MLP | 0.9136
±0.0070 | |
| 42 | DMD-ACMP | 0.8810
±0.0240 | This paper |
| 68 | H2GCN | 0.8623
±0.0471 best reported | best at pub: Design your own universe: a physics-informed agnostic method for enhancing graph neural networks (2024) best today: $P^2$GNN: Two Prototype Sets to boost GNN Performance (2026) Difference within reported uncertainty; not counted as underperformance. |
| 119 | DMD-GCN | 0.8360
±0.0310 | This paper |
| 138 | SAGE | 0.7140
±0.0120 | best today: Language Models as Messengers: Enhancing Message Passing in Heterophilic Graph Learning (2025) Improvement within reported uncertainty; not highlighted. |
| 142 | GRAND | 0.8246
±0.0709 best reported | best at pub: Dirichlet Energy Enhancement of Graph Neural Networks by Framelet Augmentation (2023) best today: Graph Navier–Stokes Networks (2026) Difference within reported uncertainty; not counted as underperformance. |
| 157 | GraphSAGE | 0.8196
±0.0739 | |
| 181 | DMD-SGC | 0.8000
±0.0190 | This paper |
| 263 | Framelets | 0.7260
±0.0030 | This paper |
| # | Model | Accuracy ↑ | Paper |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | DMD++ | 0.9190
±0.0260 | This paper |
| 2 | F-GREAD-BS | 0.9059
±0.0380 | |
| 3 | APPNP | 0.9010
±0.0350 | prev best: Restructuring Graphs for Higher Homophily via Adaptive Spectral Clustering (AAAI 2022) |
| 5 | GPRGNN | 0.8990
±0.0300 | prev best: Restructuring Graphs for Higher Homophily via Adaptive Spectral Clustering (AAAI 2022) Improvement within reported uncertainty; not highlighted. |
| 10 | DMD-ACMP | 0.8940
±0.0220 | This paper |
| 12 | Framelets | 0.8890
±0.0320 | This paper |
| 13 | GRAND | 0.8860
±0.0210 | prev best: Unleashing the Potential of Fractional Calculus in Graph Neural Networks with FROND (ICLR 2024) |
| 22 | H2GCN | 0.8790
±0.0420 | prev best: Unleashing the Potential of Fractional Calculus in Graph Neural Networks with FROND (ICLR 2024) Improvement within reported uncertainty; not highlighted. |
| 37 | MLP | 0.8629
±0.0450 | |
| 44 | DMD-GCN | 0.8520
±0.0210 | This paper |
| 63 | GCN | 0.8310
±0.0320 | |
| 64 | DMD-SGC | 0.8300
±0.0180 | This paper |
| 149 | SAGE | 0.6480
±0.0520 | This paper |
LRGB
PascalVOC-SP
Global leaderboard →Default metric is F1. The paper reports 4 values on F1 and 3 values on F1-macro .
| # | Model | F1 ↑ default | F1-macro ↑ | Paper |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | NeuralWalker | 0.4912
±
0.0042 | — | |
| 2 | PPGT | 0.4641
±
0.0033 | — | |
| 3 | CRaWl | 0.4588
±
0.0079 | — | |
| 41 | GatedGCN | 0.3880
±
0.0040 | — | |
| 80 | DMD-GCN | —
| 0.2430
±
0.0140 | F1-macro
0.2430
±
0.0140 |
| 80 | DMD++ | —
| 0.2410
±
0.0170 | F1-macro
0.2410
±
0.0170 |
| 81 | GCN | 0.2380
±0.0160 | — | F1-macro
— prev best: Where Did the Gap Go? Reassessing the Long-Range Graph Benchmark (TMLR 2023) |
| 83 | DMD-SGC | —
| 0.2170
±
0.0360 | F1-macro
0.2170
±
0.0360 |
| 83 | SGC | 0.2160
±
0.0390 | — | F1-macro
— |
| 89 | GPRGNN | 0.1520
±
0.0240 | — | F1-macro
— |
| 93 | MLP | 0.1140
±
0.0230 | — | F1-macro
— |
COCO-SP
Global leaderboard →Default metric is F1. The paper reports 6 values on F1 and 1 value on F1-macro .
| # | Model | F1 ↑ default | F1-macro ↑ | Paper |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | FloydNet | 0.4901 | — | |
| 2 | CRaWl | 0.4588
±
0.0079 | — | |
| 3 | GPS | 0.4440
±
0.0065 | — | |
| 16 | GatedGCN | 0.3880
±
0.0040 | — | |
| 45 | GCN | 0.2078
±0.0031 best reported | — | F1-macro
— best at pub: Where Did the Gap Go? Reassessing the Long-Range Graph Benchmark (TMLR 2023) |
| 60 | DMD++ | 0.0910
±
0.0090 | — | F1-macro
— |
| 62 | DMD-SGC | 0.0830
±
0.0120 | — | F1-macro
— |
| 63 | DMD-GCN | —
| 0.0810
±
0.0150 | F1-macro
0.0810
±
0.0150 |
| 72 | SGC | 0.0560
±
0.0110 | — | F1-macro
— |
| 73 | GPRGNN | 0.0440
±
0.0150 | — | F1-macro
— |
| 74 | MLP | 0.0310
±
0.0160 | — | F1-macro
— |
