FedBook: A Unified Federated Graph Foundation Codebook with Intra-domain and Inter-domain Knowledge Modeling

Zhengyu Wu, Yinlin Zhu, Xunkai Li, Ziang Qiu, Ronghua Li, Guoren Wang, Chenghu Zhou

Main figure for FedBook: A Unified Federated Graph Foundation Codebook with Intra-domain and Inter-domain Knowledge Modeling

Abstract

Foundation models have shown remarkable cross-domain generalization in language and vision, inspiring the development of graph foundation models (GFMs). However, existing GFMs typically assume centralized access to multi-domain graphs, which is often infeasible due to privacy and institutional constraints. Federated Graph Foundation Models (FedGFMs) address this limitation, but their effectiveness fundamentally hinges on constructing a robust global codebook that achieves intra-domain coherence by consolidating mutually reinforcing semantics within each domain, while also maintaining inter-domain diversity by retaining heterogeneous knowledge across domains. To this end, we propose FedBook, a unified federated graph foundation codebook that systematically aggregates clients’ local codebooks during server-side federated pre-training. FedBook follows a two-phase process: (1), where low-frequency tokens are refined by referencing more semantically reliable high-frequency tokens across clients to enhance domain-specific coherence; and (2), where client contributions are weighted by the semantic distinctiveness of their codebooks during the aggregation of the global GFM, thereby preserving cross-domain diversity. Extensive experiments on 8 benchmarks across multiple domains and tasks demonstrate that FedBook consistently outperforms 21 baselines, including isolated supervised learning, FL/FGL, federated adaptations of centralized GFMs, and FedGFM techniques.

Benchmark Results

Tested on 3 datasets 14 baseline values reported too low

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

Classic

#ModelAccuracy ↑Paper
1
GCN
actual #1 vs paper #229 228 places worse
0.9302 ±0.0011
best reported
actual #1 vs paper #229 228 places worse
paper 0.7526 ±0.0022
paper 0.7526 ±0.0022 Δ at pub 0.1776
2
RSE + RGCN (70b)
0.8852 ±0.0019
3
LEMP+T
0.8825
9
SAGE
0.8771
31
GAT
actual #31 vs paper #233 202 places worse
0.8533
best reported
actual #31 vs paper #233 202 places worse
paper 0.7492 ±0.0015
paper 0.7492 ±0.0015 Δ at pub 0.1041
54
GIN
actual #54 vs paper #240 186 places worse
0.8303 ±0.0021
best reported
actual #54 vs paper #240 186 places worse
paper 0.7437 ±0.0028
69
GraphSAGE
actual #69 vs paper #230 161 places worse
0.8146 ±0.0010
best reported
actual #69 vs paper #230 161 places worse
paper 0.7515 ±0.0024
152
FedSage
actual #152 vs paper #216 64 places worse
0.7864 ±0.0034
best reported
actual #152 vs paper #216 64 places worse
paper 0.7622 ±0.0036
paper 0.7622 ±0.0036 Δ at pub 0.0242
154
FedGTA
actual #154 vs paper #210 56 places worse
0.7860 ±0.0024
best reported
actual #154 vs paper #210 56 places worse
paper 0.7686 ±0.0024
paper 0.7686 ±0.0024 Δ at pub 0.0174
166
FED-PUB
actual #166 vs paper #201 35 places worse
0.7832 ±0.0043
best reported
actual #166 vs paper #201 35 places worse
paper 0.7720 ±0.0024
paper 0.7720 ±0.0024 Δ at pub 0.0112
169
FedTAD
actual #169 vs paper #214 45 places worse
0.7822 ±0.0027
best reported
actual #169 vs paper #214 45 places worse
paper 0.7650 ±0.0022
paper 0.7650 ±0.0022 Δ at pub 0.0172
187
FedAvg
actual #187 vs paper #216 29 places worse
0.7767 ±0.0013
best reported
actual #187 vs paper #216 29 places worse
paper 0.7622 ±0.0029
paper 0.7622 ±0.0029 Δ at pub 0.0145
191
MOON
actual #191 vs paper #218 27 places worse
0.7754 ±0.0024
best reported
actual #191 vs paper #218 27 places worse
paper 0.7615 ±0.0009
paper 0.7615 ±0.0009 Δ at pub 0.0139
214
FGSSL
actual #214 vs paper #214
0.7662 ±0.0041
actual #214 vs paper #214
paper 0.7662 ±0.0041

Improvement within reported uncertainty; not highlighted.

paper 0.7662 ±0.0041 Δ at pub 0.0037
237
MLP
0.7469 ±0.0085
240
Linear
actual #240 vs paper #248 8 places worse
0.7438 ±0.0016
best reported
actual #240 vs paper #248 8 places worse
paper 0.7252 ±0.0008
paper 0.7252 ±0.0008 Δ at pub 0.0186

OGB

#ModelAccuracy ↑Paper
1
GIANT-XRT
0.7612 ±0.0016
2
GEGCN
0.7576 ±0.0064
3
AGDN
0.7522 ±0.0007
13
FGSSL
0.7377 ±0.0030
This paper
15
GAT
actual #15 vs paper #89 74 places worse
0.7365 ±0.0011
best reported
actual #15 vs paper #89 74 places worse
paper 0.6850 ±0.0021
paper 0.6850 ±0.0021 Δ at pub 0.0515
18
FedTAD
0.7352 ±0.0039
This paper
19
FedSage
0.7333 ±0.0048
This paper
20
FedGTA
0.7320 ±0.0022
This paper
21
FED-PUB
0.7319 ±0.0022
This paper
23
GCN
actual #23 vs paper #87 64 places worse
0.7300 ±0.0017
best reported
actual #23 vs paper #87 64 places worse
paper 0.6943 ±0.0041
25
GraphSAGE
actual #25 vs paper #89 64 places worse
0.7277 ±0.0016
best reported
actual #25 vs paper #89 64 places worse
paper 0.6871 ±0.0030
26
SAGE
0.7267 ±0.0031
38
MOON
0.7212 ±0.0033
This paper
73
FedAvg
0.7103 ±0.0025
This paper
81
GIN
actual #81 vs paper #89 8 places worse
0.6893 ±0.0020
actual #81 vs paper #89 8 places worse
paper 0.6893 ±0.0020
paper 0.6893 ±0.0020 Δ at pub 0.0491 Δ today 0.0153
97
Linear
0.6628 ±0.0010
This paper
107
MLP
0.5765 ±0.0012

Knowledge Graphs

#ModelMRR ↑Paper
1
FedSage
0.8426 ±0.0026
This paper
2
FED-PUB
0.8348 ±0.0025
This paper
3
FedAvg
0.8252 ±0.0023
This paper
4
GAT
actual #4 vs paper #4
0.8244 ±0.0037
actual #4 vs paper #4
paper 0.8244 ±0.0037
paper 0.8244 ±0.0037 Δ at pub 0.0228
5
MOON
0.8231 ±0.0025
This paper
6
Linear
actual #6 vs paper #6
0.8225 ±0.0023
actual #6 vs paper #6
paper 0.8225 ±0.0023
paper 0.8225 ±0.0023 Δ at pub 0.0375
7
GCN
actual #7 vs paper #7
0.8171 ±0.0030
actual #7 vs paper #7
paper 0.8171 ±0.0030
paper 0.8171 ±0.0030 Δ at pub 0.0792
8
GraphSAGE
0.8152 ±0.0024
This paper
9
GIN
0.8124 ±0.0055
This paper
SOTA performance (not significantly different from the best) Baseline / comparison (this paper) Global context (other papers) Best at pub — reported result worse than the best known when published (best reported in green) Best at pub — reported value improved over the best known when published Improved at pub — later paper surpassed this result