ICLR 2025

City-Networks

Huidong Liang, H. Borde, Baskaran Sripathmanathan, Michael M. Bronstein, Xiaowen Dong

Main figure for City-Networks

Abstract

Long-range dependencies are critical for effective graph representation learning, yet most existing datasets focus on small graphs tailored to inductive tasks, offering limited insight into long-range interactions. Current evaluations primarily compare models employing global attention (e.g., graph transformers) with those using local neighborhood aggregation (e.g., message-passing neural networks) without a direct measurement of long-range dependency. In this work, we introduce City-Networks, a novel large-scale transductive learning dataset derived from real-world city road networks. This dataset features graphs with over $10^5$ nodes and significantly larger diameters than those in existing benchmarks, naturally embodying long-range information. We annotate the graphs based on local node eccentricities, ensuring that the classification task inherently requires information from distant nodes. Furthermore, we propose a generic measurement based on the Jacobians of neighbors from distant hops, offering a principled quantification of long-range dependencies. Finally, we provide theoretical justifications for both our dataset design and the proposed measurement—particularly by focusing on over-smoothing and influence score dilution, which establishes a robust foundation for further exploration of long-range interactions in graph neural networks. Our and are available on, and the code for reproducing the experimental results can be found at.

Benchmark Results

Tested on 4 datasets

Tables show presented results in global context (best 3 papers + GCN + MLP).

City-Networks

#ModelAccuracy ↑Paper
1
GAT
actual #1 vs paper #13 12 places worse
0.5583 ±0.0042
best reported
actual #1 vs paper #13 12 places worse
paper 0.5110 ±0.0030
2
Exphormer
0.5510 ±0.0080
This paper
3
GraphSAGE
0.5460 ±0.0020
This paper
4
ChebNet
0.5410 ±0.0020
This paper
10
GCN
0.5320 ±0.0030
This paper
11
GraphGPS
0.5210 ±0.0060
This paper
12
SGFormer
0.5200 ±0.0080
This paper
13
GCNII
0.5130 ±0.0020
This paper
14
DropEdge
0.4820 ±0.0020
This paper
15
MLP
0.2550 ±0.0040
This paper
#ModelAccuracy ↑Paper
1
GAT
actual #1 vs paper #4 3 places worse
0.7253 ±0.0023
best reported
actual #1 vs paper #4 3 places worse
paper 0.6800 ±0.0050
2
Exphormer
0.7020 ±0.0040
This paper
3
GatedGCN
0.6880 ±0.0021
4
GraphSAGE
0.6830 ±0.0050
This paper
7
ChebNet
0.6650 ±0.0010
This paper
9
SGFormer
0.6410 ±0.0030
This paper
11
GraphGPS
0.6300 ±0.0050
This paper
12
GCN
0.6210 ±0.0020
This paper
13
GCNII
0.6150 ±0.0040
This paper
14
DropEdge
0.6080 ±0.0040
This paper
15
MLP
0.2840 ±0.0060
This paper
#ModelAccuracy ↑Paper
1
GatedGCN
0.6147 ±0.0014
2
GINE
0.5760 ±0.0020
3
GAT
actual #3 vs paper #8 5 places worse
0.5719 ±0.0109
best reported
actual #3 vs paper #8 5 places worse
paper 0.5200 ±0.0030
5
GraphSAGE
0.5540 ±0.0020
This paper
6
GCN
actual #6 vs paper #8 2 places worse
0.5525 ±0.0006
best reported
actual #6 vs paper #8 2 places worse
paper 0.5010 ±0.0070
7
ChebNet
0.5470 ±0.0020
This paper
9
Exphormer
0.4950 ±0.0040
This paper
10
SGFormer
0.4830 ±0.0030
This paper
11
GCNII
0.4820 ±0.0030
This paper
12
DropEdge
0.4500 ±0.0030
This paper
13
MLP
0.2790 ±0.0010
This paper
#ModelAccuracy ↑Paper
1
Exphormer
0.6380 ±0.0060
This paper
2
ChebNet
0.6140 ±0.0040
This paper
3
GraphSAGE
0.6140 ±0.0030
This paper
4
SGFormer
0.6010 ±0.0070
This paper
5
GraphGPS
0.5980 ±0.0050
This paper
6
GAT
0.5950 ±0.0030
This paper
7
GCN
0.5830 ±0.0030
This paper
8
GCNII
0.5600 ±0.0030
This paper
9
DropEdge
0.5550 ±0.0030
This paper
10
MLP
0.2410 ±0.0050
This paper
SOTA performance (not significantly different from the best) Baseline / comparison (this paper) Global context (other papers) Best today — OK at publication; today's leaderboard best is elsewhere