Can TabPFN Compete with GNNs for Node Classification via Graph Tabularization?
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
Foundation models pretrained on large data have demonstrated remarkable zero-shot generalization capabilities across domains. Building on the success of TabPFN for tabular data and its recent extension to time series, we investigate whether graph node classification can be effectively reformulated as a tabular learning problem. We introduce TabPFN-GN, which transforms graph data into tabular features by extracting node attributes, structural properties, positional encodings, and optionally smoothed neighborhood features. This enables TabPFN to perform direct node classification without any graph-specific training or language model dependencies. Our experiments on 12 benchmark datasets reveal that TabPFN-GN achieves competitive performance with GNNs on homophilous graphs and consistently outperforms them on heterophilous graphs. These results demonstrate that principled feature engineering can bridge the gap between tabular and graph domains, providing a practical alternative to task-specific GNN training and LLM-dependent graph foundation 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.
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) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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