Learning Posterior Predictive Distributions for Node Classification from Synthetic Graph Priors
Abstract
One of the most challenging problems in graph machine learning is generalizing across graphs with diverse properties. Graph neural networks (GNNs) face a fundamental limitation: they require separate training for each new graph, preventing universal generalization across diverse graph datasets. A critical challenge facing GNNs lies in their reliance on labeled training data for each individual graph, a requirement that hinders the capacity for universal node classification due to the heterogeneity inherent in graphs --- differences in homophily levels, community structures, and feature distributions across datasets. Inspired by the success of large language models (LLMs) that achieve in-context learning through massive-scale pre-training on diverse datasets, we introduce NodePFN. This universal node classification method generalizes to arbitrary graphs without graph-specific training. NodePFN learns posterior predictive distributions (PPDs) by training only on thousands of synthetic graphs generated from carefully designed priors. Our synthetic graph generation covers real-world graphs through the use of random networks with controllable homophily levels and structural causal models for complex feature-label relationships. We develop a dual-branch architecture combining context-query attention mechanisms with local message passing to enable graph-aware in-context learning. Extensive evaluation on 23 benchmarks demonstrates that a single pre-trained NodePFN achieves 71.27\
Benchmark Results
Tested on 16 datasets 41 baseline values reported too low Non-standard metric on 5 datasets
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) |
| 38 | TFGNN | 0.8921
±0.0040 best reported | best at pub: Polynomial Selection in Spectral Graph Neural Networks: An Error-Sum of Function Slices Approach (WWW 2024) |
| 39 | SAGE | 0.8911
±0.0012 | |
| 44 | GAT | 0.8897
±0.0014 best reported | |
| 223 | SGC | 0.8509
±0.0648 best reported | best at pub: LOGIN: A Large Language Model Consulted Graph Neural Network Training Framework (2024) Difference within reported uncertainty; not counted as underperformance. |
| 524 | NodePFN | 0.8206
±0.0029 | This paper |
| 652 | GraphAny(Cora) | 0.8018
±0.0013 | This paper |
| 724 | MLP | 0.7768 best reported | best at pub: Understanding Heterophily for Graph Neural Networks (ICML 2024) |
| 802 | Linear | 0.7237
±0.0033 best reported | |
| 876 | LabelProp | 0.6030 | This paper |
| 896 | TabPFN | 0.5310 | This paper |
| 920 | HGC | 0.2250 | This paper |
| # | 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 | |
| 350 | MLP | 0.7289
±0.0010 | |
| 712 | NodePFN | 0.6730 | This paper |
| 891 | TabPFN | 0.3294 | 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 | |
| 72 | TFGNN | 0.9000
±0.0020 best reported | best at pub: Polynomial Selection in Spectral Graph Neural Networks: An Error-Sum of Function Slices Approach (WWW 2024) |
| 141 | SGC | 0.8832
±0.0055 best reported | best at pub: LOGIN: A Large Language Model Consulted Graph Neural Network Training Framework (2024) |
| 210 | MLP | 0.8690
±0.0074 | |
| 679 | NodePFN | 0.7800
±0.2400 | This paper |
| 848 | Linear | 0.6866
±0.0224 best reported | best at pub: Generalizing GNNs with Tokenized Mixture of Experts (KDD 2026) |
| 864 | LabelProp | 0.6344
±0.0400 | This paper |
| 875 | HGC | 0.4632 | This paper |
| # | Model | Accuracy ↑ | Paper |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | GraphTARIF | 0.9703
±0.0019 | |
| 2 | GAT | 0.9669
±0.0014 best reported | |
| 3 | GAT+T | 0.9660
±0.0007 | |
| 7 | SAGE | 0.9643
±0.0027 | |
| 8 | GCN | 0.9632
±0.0008 best reported | |
| 390 | MLP | 0.9128
±0.0063 best reported | best at pub: Clarify Confused Nodes via Separated Learning (2023) |
| 419 | GraphAny(Products) | 0.9064
±0.0082 | This paper |
| 427 | NodePFN | 0.9053
±0.0013 | This paper |
| # | Model | Accuracy ↑ | Paper |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | GCN | 0.9302
±0.0011 | |
| 2 | RSE + RGCN (70b) | 0.8852
±0.0019 | |
| 3 | LEMP+T | 0.8825 | |
| 9 | SAGE | 0.8771 | |
| 79 | LLaGA | 0.8074 best reported | |
| 156 | OFA | 0.7855
±0.0037 best reported | best at pub: Towards Effective Federated Graph Foundation Model via Mitigating Knowledge Entanglement (NeurIPS 2025) |
| 216 | NodePFN | 0.7629 | This paper |
| 237 | MLP | 0.7469
±0.0085 | |
| 239 | InstructGLM | 0.7440 best reported | |
| 251 | TabPFN | 0.7208
±0.0059 best reported | best at pub: Can TabPFN Compete with GNNs for Node Classification via Graph Tabularization? (LoG 2025) |
| 279 | GraphText | 0.6735 | 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: GrokFormer: Graph Fourier Kolmogorov-Arnold Transformers (ICML 2024) |
| 34 | MLP | 0.9230
±0.0070 | |
| 40 | H2GCN | 0.9189
±0.0393 best reported | best at pub: GrokFormer: Graph Fourier Kolmogorov-Arnold Transformers (ICML 2024) |
| 53 | GraphSAGE | 0.9000
±0.0365 | |
| 61 | FAGCN | 0.8961
±0.0152 best reported | best at pub: Node-oriented Spectral Filtering for Graph Neural Networks (2022) |
| 270 | Linear | 0.7838 best reported | best at pub: View Space: Learning Representation across Arbitrary Graphs (ICML 2025) |
| 300 | NodePFN | 0.7622
±0.0753 | This paper |
| 330 | SGC | 0.7440
±0.0600 best reported | best at pub: Restructuring Graphs for Higher Homophily via Adaptive Spectral Clustering (AAAI 2022) |
| 549 | HGC | 0.5754
±0.0630 | This paper |
| 621 | LabelProp | 0.2353
±0.0551 | This paper |
| 622 | TFGNN | 0.1991
±0.0610 | This paper |
| # | Model | Accuracy ↑ | Paper |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | P^2GNN | 0.9541
±0.0272 | |
| 2 | ACM-GCN | 0.9480
±0.0380 | |
| 3 | RF-GCN | 0.9429 | |
| 22 | GPRGNN | 0.9157
±0.0196 best reported | best at pub: Simplified PCNet with Robustness (2024) |
| 24 | MLP | 0.9136
±0.0070 | |
| 38 | FAGCN | 0.8852
±0.0133 best reported | best at pub: Node-oriented Spectral Filtering for Graph Neural Networks (2022) |
| 68 | H2GCN | 0.8623
±0.0471 best reported | best at pub: $P^2$GNN: Two Prototype Sets to boost GNN Performance (2026) |
| 138 | SAGE | 0.8269 | |
| 269 | NodePFN | 0.7189
±0.0276 | This paper |
| # | Model | Accuracy ↑ | Paper |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | DiGGR | 0.4535
±0.0353 | |
| 2 | TRIGON | 0.4402
±0.0028 | |
| 3 | DoG | 0.4320
±0.0120 | |
| 42 | MLP | 0.4026
±0.0108 | |
| 52 | GPRGNN | 0.3992
±0.0067 best reported | best at pub: LON-GNN: Spectral GNNs with Learnable Orthonormal Basis (2023) best today: GrokFormer: Graph Fourier Kolmogorov-Arnold Transformers (ICML 2024) |
| 56 | FAGCN | 0.3970 best reported | best at pub: Beyond Low-frequency Information in Graph Convolutional Networks (AAAI 2021) |
| 68 | GraphSAGE | 0.3899
±0.0085 | |
| 71 | H2GCN | 0.3885
±0.0117 best reported | best at pub: $P^2$GNN: Two Prototype Sets to boost GNN Performance (2026) |
| 289 | NodePFN | 0.3299
±0.0109 | This paper |
| # | Model | Accuracy ↑ | Paper |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Hetero-S (GAT 8-layer) | 0.8693 | |
| 2 | Dir-GNN+CNA | 0.8586
±0.0180 | |
| 3 | GAT | 0.8560 | |
| 52 | GCN | 0.7033 | |
| 72 | GPRGNN | 0.6748
±0.0040 best reported | best at pub: $P^2$GNN: Two Prototype Sets to boost GNN Performance (2026) |
| 107 | FAGCN | 0.6344
±0.0205 best reported | best at pub: Beyond Smoothing: Unsupervised Graph Representation Learning with Edge Heterophily Discriminating (AAAI 2022) |
| 133 | H2GCN | 0.6030
±0.0231 best reported | best at pub: Optimization-Induced Graph Implicit Nonlinear Diffusion (ICML 2022) |
| 169 | MLP | 0.5429 | |
| 197 | NodePFN | 0.5013
±0.0330 | This paper |
| # | Model | Accuracy ↑ | Paper |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | IBG-NN | 0.7763
±0.0179 | |
| 2 | Dir-GNN+CNA | 0.7747
±0.0128 | |
| 3 | DHGNN | 0.7684
±0.0161 | |
| 39 | H2GCN | 0.6190
±0.0140 best reported | best at pub: Efficient Learning on Large Graphs using a Densifying Regularity Lemma (2025) |
| 46 | GCN | 0.6067 | |
| 76 | GPRGNN | 0.5435
±0.0087 best reported | best at pub: Directed Homophily-Aware Graph Neural Network (2025) |
| 129 | NodePFN | 0.4340
±0.0103 | This paper |
| 139 | FAGCN | 0.4259
±0.0069 best reported | best at pub: Gradient Gating for Deep Multi-Rate Learning on Graphs (ICLR 2022) |
| 172 | MLP | 0.3930
±0.0079 |
| # | Model | Accuracy ↑ | Paper |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | DMD++ | 0.9190
±0.0260 | |
| 2 | F-GREAD-BS | 0.9059
±0.0380 | |
| 3 | APPNP | 0.9010
±0.0350 | |
| 37 | MLP | 0.8629
±0.0450 | |
| 63 | GCN | 0.8310
±0.0320 | |
| 70 | NodePFN | 0.8118
±0.0570 | This paper |
| 79 | Linear | 0.8000
±0.0215 | This paper |
| 91 | SGC | 0.7780
±0.0470 best reported | best at pub: Restructuring Graphs for Higher Homophily via Adaptive Spectral Clustering (AAAI 2022) |
| 150 | HGC | 0.6432
±0.0251 | This paper |
| 226 | LabelProp | 0.1608
±0.0215 | This paper |
| 227 | TFGNN | 0.1451
±0.0301 | This paper |
Heterogeneous Graph Benchmarks
DBLP
Global leaderboard →Sorted by Accuracy. Highlighted rows are from other papers.
| # | Model | Accuracy ↑ | Paper |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | HG-SCM | 0.9490
±0.0015 | |
| 2 | SeHGNN | 0.9489
±0.0018 | |
| 3 | AdvSynGNN | 0.9486
±0.0012 | |
| 31 | GAT | 0.8859
±0.0010 best reported | best at pub: I'm Me, We're Us, and I'm Us: Tri-directional Contrastive Learning on Hypergraphs (AAAI 2022) |
| 36 | GCN | 0.8758
±0.0020 best reported | best at pub: I'm Me, We're Us, and I'm Us: Tri-directional Contrastive Learning on Hypergraphs (AAAI 2022) |
| 65 | MLP | 0.8118
±0.0020 best reported | best at pub: I'm Me, We're Us, and I'm Us: Tri-directional Contrastive Learning on Hypergraphs (AAAI 2022) |
| 104 | NodePFN | 0.7471
±0.0039 | This paper |
| 105 | GraphSAGE | 0.7455
±0.0061 | |
| 112 | GraphAny(Cora) | 0.7173
±0.0094 | This paper |
Heterophily Benchmark
Minesweeper
Global leaderboard →Sorted by Accuracy. Highlighted rows are from other papers.
| # | Model | Accuracy ↑ | Paper |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | GraphTARIF | 0.9903
±0.0019 | |
| 2 | BuNN | 0.9899
±0.0016 | |
| 3 | M3Dphormer | 0.9827
±0.0020 | |
| 5 | GAT | 0.9786
±0.0037 best reported | best at pub: Multi-Scale Harmonic Encoding for Feature-Wise Graph Message Passing (2025) |
| 9 | GCN | 0.9744
±0.0017 best reported | best at pub: Multi-Scale Harmonic Encoding for Feature-Wise Graph Message Passing (2025) |
| 11 | SAGE | 0.9709
±0.0100 | |
| 39 | NodePFN | 0.8066
±0.0025 | This paper |
| 40 | GraphAny(Cora) | 0.8046
±0.0015 | This paper |
| 43 | MLP | 0.8000 | This paper |
Tolokers
Global leaderboard →Sorted by Accuracy. Highlighted rows are from other papers.
| # | Model | Accuracy ↑ | Paper |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | NT* | 0.8591
±0.0083 | |
| 2 | Polynormer | 0.8591
±0.0074 | |
| 3 | Dir-NT | 0.8502
±0.0077 | |
| 7 | GCN | 0.8364
±0.0067 best reported | |
| 20 | NodePFN | 0.7861
±0.0006 | This paper |
| 22 | GAT | 0.7850
±0.0055 | Improvement within reported uncertainty; not highlighted. |
| 26 | GraphAny(Wisconsin) | 0.7824
±0.0003 | This paper |
| 28 | MLP | 0.7816
±0.0002 | This paper |
Questions
Global leaderboard →Sorted by Accuracy. Highlighted rows are from other papers.
| # | Model | Accuracy ↑ | Paper |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | MLP | 0.9733
±0.0006 | This paper |
| 2 | AGS-GNN | 0.9727 | |
| 3 | MeanGNN | 0.9716
±0.0006 | |
| 4 | GCN | 0.9715
±0.0004 | This paper |
| 5 | GAT | 0.9713
±0.0005 best reported | best at pub: Equivariance Everywhere All At Once: A Recipe for Graph Foundation Models (2025) Difference within reported uncertainty; not counted as underperformance. |
| 6 | GraphAny(Wisconsin) | 0.9711 | This paper |
| 12 | NodePFN | 0.9702
±0.0001 | This paper |
| 33 | SAGE | 0.7644 |
LINKX Benchmarks
Deezer
Global leaderboard →Sorted by Accuracy. Highlighted rows are from other papers.
| # | Model | Accuracy ↑ | Paper |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | CLP | 0.6569
±0.0032 | |
| 2 | FAGCN | 0.6504
±0.0045 | |
| 3 | CPGNN | 0.6495
±0.0039 | |
| 6 | MLP | 0.6377
±0.0030 best reported | best at pub: Simplifying Node Classification on Heterophilous Graphs with Compatible Label Propagation (TMLR 2022) |
| 10 | GCN | 0.5994
±0.0055 best reported | best at pub: Simplifying Node Classification on Heterophilous Graphs with Compatible Label Propagation (TMLR 2022) |
| 12 | GAT | 0.5599
±0.0378 | prev best: Simplifying Node Classification on Heterophilous Graphs with Compatible Label Propagation (TMLR 2022) |
| 15 | NodePFN | 0.5345
±0.0065 | This paper |
| 16 | GraphAny(Wisconsin) | 0.5213
±0.0302 | This paper |
