arXiv:2606.06397cs.LG2026-06被引 1

按图结构曲率分层评估模型,发现性能与几何特性强相关。

The Post-GCN Decade Revisited: Curvature-Stratified Evaluation of Relational Learning

论文配图:The Post-GCN Decade Revisited: Curvature-Stratified Evaluation of Relational Learning
图 1 · 摘自论文原文
  • 按正、负、零曲率划分数据集,分层评估模型表现
  • 18种模型在不同曲率下排名变化显著,性能依赖几何结构
  • 适合关注模型泛化性与评估公平性的研究者

当前关系学习的评估依赖于对异构数据集平均化的平铺榜单,隐含了统一结构的假设。我们证明该假设引入系统性偏差:掩盖了与几何相关的性能差异,导致对模型泛化能力的误判。本文识别出内在几何是影响模型有效性的关键潜在因素。我们发现传统聚合指标会隐藏关键性能权衡,仅在按几何属性分层后才能显现。为此,我们提出曲率分层评估框架,将数据集划分为正曲率、负曲率和近零曲率三类。基准测试涵盖18种代表性模型(包括GCNs、GFMs及表格学习方法)和14个数据集。结果表明,模型排名在各曲率区间内稳定,但在区间间显著变化,说明性能本质依赖几何结构而非普遍可迁移。特别地,部分曲率区间中GFMs相比几何适配的GNNs表现趋弱。基于此,我们提出一种几何感知评估协议,相比标准聚合基准更具可靠性与可解释性。代码、分层数据集切分及评估工具均已开源,支持未来方法的可复现评估。项目主页:https://sirbabbage.github.io/CurvBench_HOME/

原文摘要 · Abstract (English)

Current evaluation practices in relational learning rely heavily on flat leaderboards that average performance across heterogeneous datasets, implicitly assuming a uniform underlying structure. We show that this assumption introduces systematic bias: it obscures geometry-dependent performance variations and can lead to misleading conclusions about model generalization. In this work, we identify intrinsic geometry as a key latent factor governing model effectiveness. We demonstrate that conventional aggregated metrics mask critical performance trade-offs that only become visible when datasets are stratified by their geometric properties. To address this issue, we introduce a curvature-stratified evaluation framework that partitions datasets into positive, negative, and near-zero curvature regimes. Our benchmark evaluates 18 representative models including Graph Convolutional Networks (GCNs), Graph Foundation Models (GFMs), and tabular learning methods across 14 datasets. We find that model rankings are highly stable within each curvature regime but shift significantly across regimes, indicating that performance is fundamentally geometry-dependent rather than universally transferable. Notably, we identify regimes where GFMs offer diminishing returns compared to geometry-aligned GNNs. Based on these findings, we propose a geometry-aware evaluation protocol that yields more reliable and interpretable comparisons than standard aggregated benchmarks. We release all code, curvature-stratified dataset splits, and evaluation tools to support reproducible and rigorous assessment of future relational learning methods. Code and datasets are provided in our project homepage: https://sirbabbage.github.io/CurvBench_HOME/.

图神经网络评估方法几何分析

Thank you to arXiv for use of its open access interoperability. PaperDance 不是 arXiv 官方产品;中文卡片由大模型生成,请以原文为准。