Papers › Learn from Heterophily: Heterophilous Information-enhanced Graph Neural Network
Learn from Heterophily: Heterophilous Information-enhanced Graph Neural Network
Yilun Zheng, Jiahao Xu, Lihui Chen
Under circumstances of heterophily, where nodes with different labels tend to be connected based on semantic meanings, Graph Neural Networks (GNNs) often exhibit suboptimal performance. Current studies on graph heterophily mainly focus on aggregation calibration or neighbor extension and address the heterophily issue by utilizing node features or structural information to improve GNN representations. In this paper, we propose and demonstrate that the valuable semantic information inherent in heterophily can be utilized effectively in graph learning by investigating the distribution of neighbors for each individual node within the graph. The theoretical analysis is carried out to demonstrate the efficacy of the idea in enhancing graph learning. Based on this analysis, we propose HiGNN, an innovative approach that constructs an additional new graph structure, that integrates heterophilous information by leveraging node distribution to enhance connectivity between nodes that share similar semantic characteristics. We conduct empirical assessments on node classification tasks using both homophilous and heterophilous benchmark datasets and compare HiGNN to popular GNN baselines and SoTA methods, confirming the effectiveness in improving graph representations. In addition, by incorporating heterophilous information, we demonstrate a notable enhancement in existing GNN-based approaches, and the homophily degree across real-world datasets, thus affirming the efficacy of our approach.
Code
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
Results from the paper archive 2025-07-28
| Task | Dataset | Model | Metric | Value | Rank at snapshot | Leaderboard | Report |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Node Classification | Actor | HiGNN | Accuracy | 37.21 ± 1.35 | #28 of 62 | Archive leaderboard | report |
| Node Classification | Chameleon | HiGNN | Accuracy | 68.86 ± 1.45 | #35 of 61 | Archive leaderboard | report |
| Node Classification | Cornell | HiGNN | Accuracy | 80.00 ± 4.26 | #40 of 60 | Archive leaderboard | report |
| Node Classification | Squirrel | HiGNN | Accuracy | 54.78 ± 1.58 | #40 of 59 | Archive leaderboard | report |
| Node Classification | Texas | HiGNN | Accuracy | 86.22 ± 4.67 | #23 of 62 | Archive leaderboard | report |
| Node Classification | Wisconsin | HiGNN | Accuracy | 85.88 ± 3.18 | #41 of 63 | 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.
Methods
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