Revisiting Link Prediction on Heterogeneous Graphs with a Multi-view Perspective
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this work, we present a novel approach for link prediction on heterogeneous networks – networks that accommodate multiple types of nodes as well as multiple types of relations among them. Specifically, we propose a multi-view network representation learning framework to incorporate structural intuitions from the underlying graph and enrich the relational representations for link prediction. The method relies on the metapath view, the community view, and the subgraph view between a source and target node pair whose linkage is to be predicted. Furthermore, our proposed model leverages a relation-aware attention mechanism to aggregate the candidate contexts in a principled way. Empirically, we demonstrate that the proposed architecture outperforms state-of-the-art transductive and inductive methods in link prediction by a significant margin. A detailed ablation study and attention weight visualizations suggest that the chosen views are complementary and useful to predict links robustly.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it