Exhaustive Evaluation of Dynamic Link Prediction
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Dynamic link prediction is a crucial task in the study of evolving graphs, which serve as abstract models for various real-world applications. Recent dynamic graph representation learning models have claimed near-perfect performance in this task. However, we argue that the standard evaluation strategy for dynamic link prediction overlooks the sparsity and recurrence patterns inherent in dynamic networks. Specifically, the current strategy suffers from issues such as evaluating models on a balanced set of positive and negative edges, neglecting the reassessment of frequently recurring positive edges, and lacking a comprehensive evaluation of both recurring and new edges.To address these limitations, we propose a novel evaluation strategy called EXHAUSTIVE, which takes into account all relevant negative edges and separately assesses the performance on recurring and new edges. Using our proposed evaluation strategy, we compare the performance of five state-of-the-art dynamic graph learning models on seven benchmark datasets. Compared to the previous common evaluation strategy, we observe an average drop of 62% in Average Precision for dynamic link prediction. Additionally, the ranking of the models also changes under the new evaluation setting. Furthermore, we demonstrate that while all models perform considerably worse when predicting new edges compared to recurring ones, the best performing models differ between the two scenarios. This highlights the importance of employing the proposed evaluation strategy for both the assessment and design of dynamic link prediction models. By adopting our novel evaluation strategy, researchers can obtain a more accurate understanding of model performance in dynamic link prediction, leading to improved evaluation and design of such models.
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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".