Quantizing Text-attributed Graphs for Semantic-Structural Integration
Abstract
Text-attributed graphs (TAGs) have emerged as a powerful representation for modeling complex relationships across diverse domains. With the rise of large language models (LLMs), there is growing interest in leveraging their capabilities for graph learning. However, current approaches face significant challenges in embedding structural information into LLM-compatible formats, requiring either computationally expensive alignment mechanisms or manual graph verbalization techniques that often lose critical structural details. Moreover, these methods typically require labeled data from source domains for effective transfer learning, significantly constraining their adaptability. We propose STAG, a novel self-supervised framework that directly quantizes graph structural information into discrete tokens using a frozen codebook. Unlike traditional quantization approaches, our method employs soft assignment and KL divergence guided quantization to address the unique challenges of graph data, which lacks natural tokenization structures. Our framework enables both LLM-based and traditional learning approaches, supporting true zero-shot transfer learning without requiring labeled data even in the source domain. Extensive experiments demonstrate state-of-the-art performance across multiple node classification benchmarks while maintaining compatibility with different LLM architectures, offering an elegant solution to bridging graph learning with LLMs.
Benchmark Results
Tested on 3 datasets 3 baseline values reported too low
Tables show presented results in global context (best 3 papers + GCN + MLP).
Classic
| # | Model | Accuracy ↑ | Paper |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | GCN | 0.9302
±0.0011 best reported | best at pub: Augmentation-Free Graph Contrastive Learning with Performance Guarantee (2022) |
| 2 | RSE + RGCN (70b) | 0.8852
±0.0019 | |
| 3 | LEMP+T | 0.8825 | |
| 9 | SAGE | 0.8771 | |
| 31 | GAT | 0.8533 best reported | best at pub: Language Models as Messengers: Enhancing Message Passing in Heterophilic Graph Learning (2025) Difference within reported uncertainty; not counted as underperformance. |
| 41 | STAG + Linear Probing | 0.8405
±0.0578 | This paper |
| 47 | STAG + Prompt Tuning* | 0.8355
±0.0594 | This paper |
| 76 | GraphMAE2 | 0.8095
±0.0496 | This paper |
| 102 | LLaMA2-7B + PT | 0.7990
±0.0769 | This paper |
| 106 | LLaMA2-13B | 0.7980
±0.0730 | This paper |
| 124 | STAG | 0.7920
±0.0841 | This paper |
| 136 | LLama2-7B | 0.7900
±0.0796 | This paper |
| 151 | DGI | 0.7865
±0.0690 | Improvement within reported uncertainty; not highlighted. |
| 156 | OFA | 0.7855
±0.0037 best reported | best at pub: Towards Effective Federated Graph Foundation Model via Mitigating Knowledge Entanglement (NeurIPS 2025) |
| 174 | Raw Feat + Linear Probing | 0.7805
±0.0747 | This paper |
| 205 | Raw Text | 0.7715
±0.0692 | This paper |
| 237 | MLP | 0.7469
±0.0085 | |
| 246 | Raw Feat + Quantization | 0.7340
±0.0819 | This paper |
| 267 | G2P2 | 0.6990
±0.1052 | This paper |
| 314 | PRODIGY | 0.4325
±0.0691 | This paper |
| 315 | GPPT | 0.2900
±0.0808 | This paper |
OGB
| # | Model | Accuracy ↑ | Paper |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Jacobi | 0.8968 | |
| 2 | GPR | 0.8953 | |
| 3 | LEMP4HG | 0.8939 | |
| 4 | SAGE | 0.8933 | |
| 6 | GCN | 0.8868 best reported | best at pub: Language Models as Messengers: Enhancing Message Passing in Heterophilic Graph Learning (2025) Difference within reported uncertainty; not counted as underperformance. |
| 9 | GAT | 0.8829 best reported | best at pub: Language Models as Messengers: Enhancing Message Passing in Heterophilic Graph Learning (2025) Difference within reported uncertainty; not counted as underperformance. |
| 12 | Raw Text | 0.8758
±0.0548 | This paper |
| 32 | OFA | 0.8623
±0.0007 best reported | best at pub: Towards Graph Foundation Models: Learning Generalities Across Graphs via Task-Trees (ICML 2024) |
| 62 | STAG + Prompt Tuning* | 0.8403
±0.0554 | This paper |
| 63 | STAG + Linear Probing | 0.8394
±0.0678 | This paper |
| 125 | GraphMAE2 | 0.8108
±0.0800 | prev best: Smoothed Graph Contrastive Learning via Seamless Proximity Integration (2024) Improvement within reported uncertainty; not highlighted. |
| 155 | STAG | 0.7975
±0.0933 | This paper |
| 227 | Raw Feat + Linear Probing | 0.7753
±0.0716 | This paper |
| 258 | G2P2 | 0.7552
±0.1010 | This paper |
| 351 | MLP | 0.6605
±0.0020 | |
| 352 | Raw Feat + Quantization | 0.6584
±0.0996 | This paper |
| 366 | PRODIGY | 0.6220
±0.0729 | This paper |
| 383 | GPPT | 0.5518
±0.1189 | This paper |
Knowledge Graphs
| # | Model | MRR ↑ | Paper |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | FedSage | 0.8426
±0.0026 | |
| 2 | FED-PUB | 0.8348
±0.0025 | |
| 3 | FedAvg | 0.8252
±0.0023 | |
| 7 | GCN | 0.8171
±0.0030 | |
| 10 | OFA | 0.8000 best reported | |
| 20 | STAG + Linear Probing | 0.5830 | This paper |
| 94 | STAG | 0.4175 | This paper |
