Papers › Finding Global Homophily in Graph Neural Networks When Meeting Heterophily

Finding Global Homophily in Graph Neural Networks When Meeting Heterophily

15 May 2022arXiv:2205.07308archive 2025-07-28

Xiang Li, Renyu Zhu, Yao Cheng, Caihua Shan, Siqiang Luo, Dongsheng Li, Weining Qian

We investigate graph neural networks on graphs with heterophily. Some existing methods amplify a node's neighborhood with multi-hop neighbors to include more nodes with homophily. However, it is a significant challenge to set personalized neighborhood sizes for different nodes. Further, for other homophilous nodes excluded in the neighborhood, they are ignored for information aggregation. To address these problems, we propose two models GloGNN and GloGNN++, which generate a node's embedding by aggregating information from global nodes in the graph. In each layer, both models learn a coefficient matrix to capture the correlations between nodes, based on which neighborhood aggregation is performed. The coefficient matrix allows signed values and is derived from an optimization problem that has a closed-form solution. We further accelerate neighborhood aggregation and derive a linear time complexity. We theoretically explain the models' effectiveness by proving that both the coefficient matrix and the generated node embedding matrix have the desired grouping effect. We conduct extensive experiments to compare our models against 11 other competitors on 15 benchmark datasets in a wide range of domains, scales and graph heterophilies. Experimental results show that our methods achieve superior performance and are also very efficient.

PaperPDFCode

In Syntology Open this paper in Syntology's Atlas, the map of the papers in Syntology's graph and their citations.

Code

recklessronan/glognn officialmentioned in paperpytorch report

Repository list and official/mentioned flags are the archive's, frozen 2025-07-28. Reachability, where shown, is from one Syntology probe window (2026-09-16 to 2026-09-18); repositories not probed show nothing. GitHub stars are not tracked.

Code Syntology ran Syntology

Not run by Syntology. Nothing on this page verifies that the listed code works.

Tasks

Node ClassificationNode Classification on Non-Homophilic (Heterophilic) Graphs

Results from the paper archive 2025-07-28

TaskDatasetModelMetricValueRank at snapshotLeaderboardReport
Node Classification Actor GloGNN++ Accuracy 37.7 ± 1.40 #18 of 62 Archive leaderboard report
Node Classification Actor GloGNN Accuracy 37.35 ± 1.30 #25 of 62 Archive leaderboard report
Node Classification Chameleon GloGNN++ Accuracy 71.21±1.84 #25 of 61 Archive leaderboard report
Node Classification Chameleon GloGNN Accuracy 69.78±2.42 #31 of 61 Archive leaderboard report
Node Classification Citeseer (48%/32%/20% fixed splits) GloGNN 1:1 Accuracy 77.41 ± 1.65 #4 of 26 Archive leaderboard report
Node Classification Citeseer (48%/32%/20% fixed splits) GloGNN++ 1:1 Accuracy 77.22 ± 1.78 #6 of 26 Archive leaderboard report
Node Classification Cora (48%/32%/20% fixed splits) GloGNN++ 1:1 Accuracy 88.33 ± 1.09 #3 of 26 Archive leaderboard report
Node Classification Cora (48%/32%/20% fixed splits) GloGNN 1:1 Accuracy 88.31 ± 1.13 #4 of 26 Archive leaderboard report
Node Classification Cornell GloGNN++ Accuracy 85.95±5.10 #14 of 60 Archive leaderboard report
Node Classification Cornell GloGNN Accuracy 83.51±4.26 #29 of 60 Archive leaderboard report
Node Classification Penn94 GloGNN++ Accuracy 85.74±0.42 #4 of 32 Archive leaderboard report
Node Classification Penn94 GloGNN Accuracy 85.57 ± 0.35 #5 of 32 Archive leaderboard report
Node Classification PubMed (48%/32%/20% fixed splits) GloGNN 1:1 Accuracy 89.62 ± 0.35 #8 of 26 Archive leaderboard report
Node Classification PubMed (48%/32%/20% fixed splits) GloGNN++ 1:1 Accuracy 89.24 ± 0.39 #13 of 26 Archive leaderboard report
Node Classification Squirrel GloGNN++ Accuracy 57.88±1.76– #28 of 59 Archive leaderboard report
Node Classification Squirrel GloGNN Accuracy 57.54±1.39 #30 of 59 Archive leaderboard report
Node Classification Texas GloGNN Accuracy 84.32±4.15 #36 of 62 Archive leaderboard report
Node Classification Texas GloGNN++ Accuracy 84.05±4.90 #38 of 62 Archive leaderboard report
Node Classification Wisconsin GloGNN++ Accuracy 88.04±3.22 #19 of 63 Archive leaderboard report
Node Classification Wisconsin GloGNN Accuracy 87.06±3.53 #31 of 63 Archive leaderboard report
Node Classification arXiv-year GloGNN++ Accuracy 54.79±0.25 #9 of 12 Archive leaderboard report
Node Classification genius GloGNN++ Accuracy 90.91 ± 0.13 #6 of 26 Archive leaderboard report
Node Classification genius GloGNN Accuracy 90.66 ± 0.11 #9 of 26 Archive leaderboard report
Node Classification genius GCNJK Accuracy 89.30 ± 0.19 #13 of 26 Archive leaderboard report
Node Classification genius MLP Accuracy 86.68 ± 0.09 #15 of 26 Archive leaderboard report
Node Classification pokec GloGNN++ Accuracy 83.05±0.07 #4 of 7 Archive leaderboard report
Node Classification on Non-Homophilic (Heterophilic) Graphs Chameleon (48%/32%/20% fixed splits) GloGNN++ 1:1 Accuracy 71.21 ± 1.84  #8 of 29 Archive leaderboard report
Node Classification on Non-Homophilic (Heterophilic) Graphs Chameleon (48%/32%/20% fixed splits) GloGNN 1:1 Accuracy 69.78 ± 2.42  #12 of 29 Archive leaderboard report
Node Classification on Non-Homophilic (Heterophilic) Graphs Cornell (48%/32%/20% fixed splits) GloGNN++ 1:1 Accuracy 85.95 ± 5.10  #3 of 27 Archive leaderboard report
Node Classification on Non-Homophilic (Heterophilic) Graphs Cornell (48%/32%/20% fixed splits) GloGNN 1:1 Accuracy 83.51 ± 4.26 #14 of 27 Archive leaderboard report
Node Classification on Non-Homophilic (Heterophilic) Graphs Film(48%/32%/20% fixed splits) GloGNN++ 1:1 Accuracy 37.70 ± 1.40  #5 of 26 Archive leaderboard report
Node Classification on Non-Homophilic (Heterophilic) Graphs Film(48%/32%/20% fixed splits) GloGNN 1:1 Accuracy 37.35 ± 1.30 #8 of 26 Archive leaderboard report
Node Classification on Non-Homophilic (Heterophilic) Graphs Penn94 GloGNN++ 1:1 Accuracy 85.74 ± 0.42 #3 of 28 Archive leaderboard report
Node Classification on Non-Homophilic (Heterophilic) Graphs Penn94 GloGNN 1:1 Accuracy 85.57 ± 0.35 #4 of 28 Archive leaderboard report
Node Classification on Non-Homophilic (Heterophilic) Graphs Squirrel (48%/32%/20% fixed splits) GloGNN++ 1:1 Accuracy 57.88 ± 1.76  #11 of 29 Archive leaderboard report
Node Classification on Non-Homophilic (Heterophilic) Graphs Squirrel (48%/32%/20% fixed splits) GloGNN 1:1 Accuracy 57.54 ± 1.39  #12 of 29 Archive leaderboard report
Node Classification on Non-Homophilic (Heterophilic) Graphs Texas (48%/32%/20% fixed splits) GloGNN 1:1 Accuracy 84.32 ± 4.15  #12 of 26 Archive leaderboard report
Node Classification on Non-Homophilic (Heterophilic) Graphs Texas (48%/32%/20% fixed splits) GloGNN++ 1:1 Accuracy 84.05 ± 4.90 #14 of 26 Archive leaderboard report
Node Classification on Non-Homophilic (Heterophilic) Graphs Wisconsin (48%/32%/20% fixed splits) GloGNN++ 1:1 Accuracy  88.04 ± 3.22  #8 of 26 Archive leaderboard report
Node Classification on Non-Homophilic (Heterophilic) Graphs Wisconsin (48%/32%/20% fixed splits) GloGNN 1:1 Accuracy 87.06 ± 3.53  #13 of 26 Archive leaderboard report
Node Classification on Non-Homophilic (Heterophilic) Graphs genius GloGNN++ 1:1 Accuracy 90.91 ± 0.13 #8 of 26 Archive leaderboard report
Node Classification on Non-Homophilic (Heterophilic) Graphs genius GloGNN 1:1 Accuracy 90.66 ± 0.11 #11 of 26 Archive leaderboard report
Node Classification on Non-Homophilic (Heterophilic) Graphs twitch-gamers GloGNN++ 1:1 Accuracy 66.34 ± 0.29 #3 of 26 Archive leaderboard report
Node Classification on Non-Homophilic (Heterophilic) Graphs twitch-gamers GloGNN 1:1 Accuracy 66.19 ± 0.29 #5 of 26 Archive leaderboard report

Ranks are positions in the archive's leaderboards as they stood at the 2025-07-28 snapshot. Results published since then are not among these rows, so a rank here is not a current standing.

Report a problem or propose a change · a person checks every report against the paper or source before anything changes; decisions are listed on /corrections