Heterogeneous Graph Neural Networks using Self-supervised Reciprocally Contrastive Learning
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
Heterogeneous graph neural network (HGNN) is a popular technique for modeling and analyzing heterogeneous graphs. Most existing HGNN-based approaches are supervised or semi-supervised learning methods requiring graphs to be annotated, which is costly and time-consuming. Self-supervised contrastive learning has been proposed to address the problem of requiring annotated data by mining intrinsic properties in the given data. However, the existing contrastive learning methods are not suitable for heterogeneous graphs because they construct contrastive views only based on data perturbation or pre-defined structural properties (e.g., meta-path) in graph data while ignoring noises in node attributes and graph topologies. We develop a robust heterogeneous graph contrastive learning approach, namely HGCL, which introduces two views on respective guidances of node attributes and graph topologies and integrates and enhances them by a reciprocally contrastive mechanism to better model heterogeneous graphs. In this new approach, we adopt distinct but suitable attribute and topology fusion mechanisms in the two views, which are conducive to mining relevant information in attributes and topologies separately. We further use both attribute similarity and topological correlation to construct high-quality contrastive samples. Extensive experiments on four large real-world heterogeneous graphs demonstrate the superiority and robustness of HGCL over several state-of-the-art methods.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 it