$P^2$GNN: Two Prototype Sets to boost GNN Performance

Arihant Jain, Gundeep Arora, Anoop Saladi, Chaosheng Dong

Main figure for $P^2$GNN: Two Prototype Sets to boost GNN Performance

Abstract

Message Passing Graph Neural Networks (MP-GNNs) have garnered attention for addressing various industry challenges, such as user recommendation and fraud detection. However, they face two major hurdles: (1) heavy reliance on local context, often lacking information about the global context or graph-level features, and (2) assumption of strong homophily among connected nodes, struggling with noisy local neighborhoods. To tackle these, we introduce $P^2$GNN, a plug-and-play technique leveraging prototypes to optimize message passing, enhancing the performance of the base GNN model. Our approach views the prototypes in two ways: (1) as universally accessible neighbors for all nodes, enriching global context, and (2) aligning messages to clustered prototypes, offering a denoising effect. We demonstrate the extensibility of our proposed method to all message-passing GNNs and conduct extensive experiments across 18 datasets, including proprietary e-commerce datasets and open-source datasets, on node recommendation and node classification tasks. Results show that $P^2$GNN outperforms production models in e-commerce and achieves the top average rank on open-source datasets, establishing it as a leading approach. Qualitative analysis supports the value of global context and noise mitigation in the local neighborhood in enhancing performance.

Proposed method: P^2GNN

Benchmark Results

Tested on 5 datasets 14 baseline values reported too low

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

Heterophilic Graphs

#ModelAccuracy ↑Paper
1
P^2GNN
0.9672 ±0.0147
This paper
2
DoG
0.9660 ±0.0210
3
GPF-plus
0.9583 ±0.0419
5
ACM-GCN
actual #5 vs paper #5
0.9557 ±0.0360
actual #5 vs paper #5
paper 0.9557 ±0.0360

Improvement within reported uncertainty; not highlighted.

paper 0.9557 ±0.0360 Δ at pub 0.0047
7
VR-GNN
0.9486 ±0.0189
This paper
22
BernNet
actual #22 vs paper #25 3 places worse
0.9328 ±0.0148
best reported
actual #22 vs paper #25 3 places worse
paper 0.9312 ±0.0065

Difference within reported uncertainty; not counted as underperformance.

paper 0.9312 ±0.0065 Δ at pub 0.0016
28
GPRGNN
actual #28 vs paper #29 1 place worse
0.9295 ±0.0131
best reported
actual #28 vs paper #29 1 place worse
paper 0.9292 ±0.0061

Difference within reported uncertainty; not counted as underperformance.

paper 0.9292 ±0.0061 Δ at pub 0.0003
34
MLP
actual #34 vs paper #35 1 place worse
0.9230 ±0.0070
best reported
actual #34 vs paper #35 1 place worse
paper 0.9226 ±0.0071

Difference within reported uncertainty; not counted as underperformance.

paper 0.9226 ±0.0071 Δ at pub 0.0004
39
GGCN
actual #39 vs paper #52 13 places worse
0.9213 ±0.0305
best reported
actual #39 vs paper #52 13 places worse
paper 0.9016 ±0.0248
best at pub: Graph Wave Networks (WWW 2025)

Difference within reported uncertainty; not counted as underperformance.

paper 0.9016 ±0.0248 Δ at pub 0.0197
40
H2GCN
actual #40 vs paper #126 86 places worse
0.9189 ±0.0393
best reported
actual #40 vs paper #126 86 places worse
paper 0.8590 ±0.0353

Difference within reported uncertainty; not counted as underperformance.

paper 0.8590 ±0.0353 Δ at pub 0.0599
53
GraphSAGE
0.9000 ±0.0365
61
FAGCN
actual #61 vs paper #77 16 places worse
0.8961 ±0.0152
best reported
actual #61 vs paper #77 16 places worse
paper 0.8885 ±0.0439

Difference within reported uncertainty; not counted as underperformance.

paper 0.8885 ±0.0439 Δ at pub 0.0076
70
GCNII
actual #70 vs paper #193 123 places worse
0.8918 ±0.0443
best reported
actual #70 vs paper #193 123 places worse
paper 0.8246 ±0.0458

Difference within reported uncertainty; not counted as underperformance.

paper 0.8246 ±0.0458 Δ at pub 0.0672
141
GloGNN
actual #141 vs paper #141
0.8524 ±0.0490
actual #141 vs paper #141
paper 0.8524 ±0.0490

Improvement within reported uncertainty; not highlighted.

paper 0.8524 ±0.0490 Δ at pub 0.0092
183
Snowball-2
0.8311 ±0.0320
This paper
184
Snowball-3
0.8311 ±0.0320
This paper
211
GAT
actual #211 vs paper #265 54 places worse
0.8162 ±0.0645
best reported
actual #211 vs paper #265 54 places worse
paper 0.7887 ±0.0086

Difference within reported uncertainty; not counted as underperformance.

paper 0.7887 ±0.0086 Δ at pub 0.0275
221
SGC-2
0.8131 ±0.0330
This paper
235
GCN + JK
actual #235 vs paper #235
0.8066 ±0.0191
actual #235 vs paper #235
paper 0.8066 ±0.0191
317
GAT+JK
0.7541 ±0.0718
This paper
#ModelAccuracy ↑Paper
1
P^2GNN
0.9541 ±0.0272
This paper
2
ACM-GCN
actual #2 vs paper #2
0.9480 ±0.0380
best reported
actual #2 vs paper #2
paper 0.9443 ±0.0276
best at pub: Heterophily-informed Message Passing (TMLR 2025)

Difference within reported uncertainty; not counted as underperformance.

paper 0.9443 ±0.0276 Δ at pub 0.0037
3
RF-GCN
0.9429
13
VR-GNN
0.9270 ±0.0270
This paper
15
GGCN
actual #15 vs paper #15
0.9230 ±0.0367
actual #15 vs paper #15
paper 0.9230 ±0.0367

Improvement within reported uncertainty; not highlighted.

paper 0.9230 ±0.0367 Δ at pub 0.0662
17
BernNet
0.9213 ±0.0164
This paper
22
GPRGNN
actual #22 vs paper #23 1 place worse
0.9157 ±0.0196
best reported
actual #22 vs paper #23 1 place worse
paper 0.9136 ±0.0070

Difference within reported uncertainty; not counted as underperformance.

paper 0.9136 ±0.0070 Δ at pub 0.0021
24
MLP
actual #24 vs paper #24
0.9136 ±0.0070
best reported
actual #24 vs paper #24
paper 0.9130 ±0.0070

Difference within reported uncertainty; not counted as underperformance.

paper 0.9130 ±0.0070 Δ at pub 0.0006
35
GCNII
actual #35 vs paper #35
0.8918 ±0.0396
actual #35 vs paper #35
paper 0.8918 ±0.0396

Improvement within reported uncertainty; not highlighted.

paper 0.8918 ±0.0396 Δ at pub 0.0148
38
FAGCN
actual #38 vs paper #43 5 places worse
0.8852 ±0.0133
best reported
actual #38 vs paper #43 5 places worse
paper 0.8803 ±0.0560

Difference within reported uncertainty; not counted as underperformance.

paper 0.8803 ±0.0560 Δ at pub 0.0049
68
H2GCN
actual #68 vs paper #68
0.8623 ±0.0471
actual #68 vs paper #68
paper 0.8623 ±0.0471

Improvement within reported uncertainty; not highlighted.

paper 0.8623 ±0.0471 Δ at pub 0.0003
74
GloGNN
actual #74 vs paper #156 82 places worse
0.8595 ±0.0510
best reported
actual #74 vs paper #156 82 places worse
paper 0.8196 ±0.0510

Difference within reported uncertainty; not counted as underperformance.

paper 0.8196 ±0.0510 Δ at pub 0.0399 Δ today 0.0399
134
Snowball-3
0.8295 ±0.0210
This paper
138
SAGE
0.8269
141
Snowball-2
0.8262 ±0.0234
This paper
158
GAT
actual #158 vs paper #222 64 places worse
0.8190 ±0.0540
best reported
actual #158 vs paper #222 64 places worse
paper 0.7600 ±0.0101
paper 0.7600 ±0.0101 Δ at pub 0.0590
242
GAT+JK
0.7443 ±0.1024
This paper
262
SGC-2
0.7262 ±0.0992
This paper
316
GCN + JK
actual #316 vs paper #316
0.6656 ±0.1382
actual #316 vs paper #316
paper 0.6656 ±0.1382

Improvement within reported uncertainty; not highlighted.

paper 0.6656 ±0.1382 Δ at pub 0.0197
#ModelAccuracy ↑Paper
1
DiGGR
0.4535 ±0.0353
2
TRIGON
0.4402 ±0.0028
3
DoG
0.4320 ±0.0120
5
P^2GNN
0.4305 ±0.0134
This paper
14
VR-GNN
0.4216 ±0.0042
This paper
16
ACM-GCN
actual #16 vs paper #16
0.4198 ±0.0089
actual #16 vs paper #16
paper 0.4198 ±0.0089

Improvement within reported uncertainty; not highlighted.

paper 0.4198 ±0.0089 Δ at pub 0.0038
21
BernNet
0.4179 ±0.0101
This paper
38
GCNII
actual #38 vs paper #38
0.4082 ±0.0179
actual #38 vs paper #38
paper 0.4082 ±0.0179

Improvement within reported uncertainty; not highlighted.

paper 0.4082 ±0.0179 Δ at pub 0.0221
42
MLP
actual #42 vs paper #76 34 places worse
0.4026 ±0.0108
best reported
actual #42 vs paper #76 34 places worse
paper 0.3858 ±0.0025
paper 0.3858 ±0.0025 Δ at pub 0.0168
52
GPRGNN
actual #52 vs paper #61 9 places worse
0.3992 ±0.0067
best reported
actual #52 vs paper #61 9 places worse
paper 0.3930 ±0.0027

Difference within reported uncertainty; not counted as underperformance.

paper 0.3930 ±0.0027 Δ at pub 0.0062 Δ today 0.0062
56
FAGCN
actual #56 vs paper #308 252 places worse
0.3970
best reported
actual #56 vs paper #308 252 places worse
paper 0.3159 ±0.0137
paper 0.3159 ±0.0137 Δ at pub 0.0811
58
GloGNN
actual #58 vs paper #71 13 places worse
0.3959 ±0.0029
best reported
actual #58 vs paper #71 13 places worse
paper 0.3880 ±0.0130

Difference within reported uncertainty; not counted as underperformance.

paper 0.3880 ±0.0130 Δ at pub 0.0079
62
GGCN
actual #62 vs paper #62
0.3929 ±0.0048
actual #62 vs paper #62
paper 0.3929 ±0.0048

Improvement within reported uncertainty; not highlighted.

paper 0.3929 ±0.0048 Δ at pub 0.0148
68
GraphSAGE
0.3899 ±0.0085
71
H2GCN
actual #71 vs paper #71
0.3885 ±0.0117
actual #71 vs paper #71
paper 0.3885 ±0.0117

Improvement within reported uncertainty; not highlighted.

paper 0.3885 ±0.0117 Δ at pub 0.0045
182
GAT
actual #182 vs paper #186 4 places worse
0.3605 ±0.0035
best reported
actual #182 vs paper #186 4 places worse
paper 0.3598 ±0.0023

Difference within reported uncertainty; not counted as underperformance.

paper 0.3598 ±0.0023 Δ at pub 0.0007
186
Snowball-3
0.3600 ±0.0136
This paper
187
Snowball-2
0.3597 ±0.0066
This paper
217
GAT+JK
0.3541 ±0.0097
This paper
260
GCN + JK
actual #260 vs paper #292 32 places worse
0.3418 ±0.0085
best reported
actual #260 vs paper #292 32 places worse
paper 0.3272 ±0.0262

Difference within reported uncertainty; not counted as underperformance.

paper 0.3272 ±0.0262 Δ at pub 0.0146
377
SGC-2
0.2881 ±0.0111
This paper
#ModelAccuracy ↑Paper
1
Hetero-S (GAT 8-layer)
0.8693
2
Dir-GNN+CNA
0.8586 ±0.0180
3
GAT
actual #3 vs paper #101 98 places worse
0.8560
best reported
actual #3 vs paper #101 98 places worse
paper 0.6390 ±0.0046
paper 0.6390 ±0.0046 Δ at pub 0.2170
28
ACM-GCN
actual #28 vs paper #63 35 places worse
0.7476 ±0.0220
best reported
actual #28 vs paper #63 35 places worse
paper 0.6845 ±0.0167
paper 0.6845 ±0.0167 Δ at pub 0.0631
45
GloGNN
actual #45 vs paper #45
0.7133 ±0.0242
actual #45 vs paper #45
paper 0.7133 ±0.0242

Improvement within reported uncertainty; not highlighted.

paper 0.7133 ±0.0242 Δ at pub 0.0012
46
VR-GNN
0.7121 ±0.0117
This paper
48
GGCN
actual #48 vs paper #57 9 places worse
0.7114 ±0.0184
best reported
actual #48 vs paper #57 9 places worse
paper 0.6950 ±0.0211

Difference within reported uncertainty; not counted as underperformance.

paper 0.6950 ±0.0211 Δ at pub 0.0164 Δ today 0.0164
52
GCN
0.7033
56
P^2GNN
0.6987 ±0.0163
This paper
66
BernNet
0.6829 ±0.0158
This paper
68
GAT+JK
0.6814 ±0.0118
This paper
72
GPRGNN
actual #72 vs paper #72
0.6748 ±0.0040
actual #72 vs paper #72
paper 0.6748 ±0.0040

Improvement within reported uncertainty; not highlighted.

paper 0.6748 ±0.0040 Δ at pub 0.0020
83
Snowball-3
0.6549 ±0.0164
This paper
94
Snowball-2
0.6499 ±0.0239
This paper
96
GCN + JK
actual #96 vs paper #96
0.6468 ±0.0285
actual #96 vs paper #96
paper 0.6468 ±0.0285

Improvement within reported uncertainty; not highlighted.

paper 0.6468 ±0.0285 Δ at pub 0.0126
103
GCNII
actual #103 vs paper #132 29 places worse
0.6386 ±0.0304
best reported
actual #103 vs paper #132 29 places worse
paper 0.6035 ±0.0270

Difference within reported uncertainty; not counted as underperformance.

paper 0.6035 ±0.0270 Δ at pub 0.0351 Δ today 0.0351
107
FAGCN
actual #107 vs paper #201 94 places worse
0.6344 ±0.0205
best reported
actual #107 vs paper #201 94 places worse
paper 0.4947 ±0.0284
112
SGC-2
0.6267 ±0.0241
This paper
133
H2GCN
actual #133 vs paper #178 45 places worse
0.6030 ±0.0231
best reported
actual #133 vs paper #178 45 places worse
paper 0.5230 ±0.0048
paper 0.5230 ±0.0048 Δ at pub 0.0800
169
MLP
actual #169 vs paper #215 46 places worse
0.5429
best reported
actual #169 vs paper #215 46 places worse
paper 0.4672 ±0.0046
paper 0.4672 ±0.0046 Δ at pub 0.0757
#ModelAccuracy ↑Paper
1
IBG-NN
0.7763 ±0.0179
2
Dir-GNN+CNA
0.7747 ±0.0128
3
DHGNN
0.7684 ±0.0161
19
GloGNN
actual #19 vs paper #137 118 places worse
0.7121 ±0.0184
best reported
actual #19 vs paper #137 118 places worse
paper 0.4265 ±0.0176
paper 0.4265 ±0.0176 Δ at pub 0.2856
25
ACM-GCN
actual #25 vs paper #66 41 places worse
0.6740 ±0.0221
best reported
actual #25 vs paper #66 41 places worse
paper 0.5631 ±0.0123
paper 0.5631 ±0.0123 Δ at pub 0.1109
39
H2GCN
actual #39 vs paper #240 201 places worse
0.6190 ±0.0140
best reported
actual #39 vs paper #240 201 places worse
paper 0.3039 ±0.0122
paper 0.3039 ±0.0122 Δ at pub 0.3151
46
GCN
0.6067
59
VR-GNN
0.5750 ±0.0118
This paper
64
P^2GNN
0.5647 ±0.0136
This paper
67
GAT
actual #67 vs paper #135 68 places worse
0.5630 ±0.0220
best reported
actual #67 vs paper #135 68 places worse
paper 0.4272 ±0.0033
paper 0.4272 ±0.0033 Δ at pub 0.1358
69
GGCN
actual #69 vs paper #69
0.5567 ±0.0187
actual #69 vs paper #69
paper 0.5567 ±0.0187

Improvement within reported uncertainty; not highlighted.

paper 0.5567 ±0.0187 Δ at pub 0.0050
76
GPRGNN
actual #76 vs paper #90 14 places worse
0.5435 ±0.0087
best reported
actual #76 vs paper #90 14 places worse
paper 0.4993 ±0.0053
paper 0.4993 ±0.0053 Δ at pub 0.0442
78
GCN + JK
actual #78 vs paper #78
0.5340 ±0.0190
actual #78 vs paper #78
paper 0.5340 ±0.0190
82
GAT+JK
0.5228 ±0.0361
This paper
86
BernNet
actual #86 vs paper #86
0.5139 ±0.0092
best reported
actual #86 vs paper #86
paper 0.5135 ±0.0073

Difference within reported uncertainty; not counted as underperformance.

paper 0.5135 ±0.0073 Δ at pub 0.0004
97
Snowball-3
0.4825 ±0.0094
This paper
99
Snowball-2
0.4788 ±0.0123
This paper
139
FAGCN
actual #139 vs paper #143 4 places worse
0.4259 ±0.0069
best reported
actual #139 vs paper #143 4 places worse
paper 0.4224 ±0.0120

Difference within reported uncertainty; not counted as underperformance.

paper 0.4224 ±0.0120 Δ at pub 0.0035 Δ today 0.0035
152
SGC-2
0.4125 ±0.0140
This paper
172
MLP
actual #172 vs paper #236 64 places worse
0.3930 ±0.0079
best reported
actual #172 vs paper #236 64 places worse
paper 0.3128 ±0.0027
paper 0.3128 ±0.0027 Δ at pub 0.0535 Δ today 0.0802
176
GCNII
actual #176 vs paper #176
0.3881 ±0.0197
actual #176 vs paper #176
paper 0.3881 ±0.0197

Improvement within reported uncertainty; not highlighted.

paper 0.3881 ±0.0197 Δ at pub 0.0034
SOTA performance (not significantly different from the best) Proposed method (this paper) 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