Papers › No Metric to Rule Them All: Toward Principled Evaluations of Graph-Learning Datasets

No Metric to Rule Them All: Toward Principled Evaluations of Graph-Learning Datasets

4 Feb 2025arXiv:2502.02379archive 2025-07-28

Corinna Coupette, Jeremy Wayland, Emily Simons, Bastian Rieck

Benchmark datasets have proved pivotal to the success of graph learning, and good benchmark datasets are crucial to guide the development of the field. Recent research has highlighted problems with graph-learning datasets and benchmarking practices -- revealing, for example, that methods which ignore the graph structure can outperform graph-based approaches on popular benchmark datasets. Such findings raise two questions: (1) What makes a good graph-learning dataset, and (2) how can we evaluate dataset quality in graph learning? Our work addresses these questions. As the classic evaluation setup uses datasets to evaluate models, it does not apply to dataset evaluation. Hence, we start from first principles. Observing that graph-learning datasets uniquely combine two modes -- the graph structure and the node features -- , we introduce RINGS, a flexible and extensible mode-perturbation framework to assess the quality of graph-learning datasets based on dataset ablations -- i.e., by quantifying differences between the original dataset and its perturbed representations. Within this framework, we propose two measures -- performance separability and mode complementarity -- as evaluation tools, each assessing, from a distinct angle, the capacity of a graph dataset to benchmark the power and efficacy of graph-learning methods. We demonstrate the utility of our framework for graph-learning dataset evaluation in an extensive set of experiments and derive actionable recommendations for improving the evaluation of graph-learning methods. Our work opens new research directions in data-centric graph learning, and it constitutes a first step toward the systematic evaluation of evaluations.

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

7 samples harvested; 3 ran; 1 honoured the contract we drafted; 4 have no recorded run. Read from Syntology's graph 2026-09-24; that is when this build read the record, not when the samples ran.

Licence: 0 of the 7 samples are pointer only, meaning Syntology does not serve that copy's text. This page shows no code text for any sample; each one links to its file in the repository.

Harvested from aidos-lab/rings. “Ran” means the sample executed on a synthesized input. It does not mean the output is correct, and nothing here reproduces the paper's results. “Honoured” and “violated” refer to a contract Syntology drafted from the code itself; “our draft was wrong” and “fixture could not drive it” are failures of Syntology's instrument, not of the code.

Each sample ends with its code_sha256, Syntology's identity for that exact code. An agent fetches the stored sample with Syntology's MCP tool get_code(code_sha256="…") (how to connect); click an identity to copy that call.

Repository labels, per sample. official repository: The archive marks this repository official for the paper. named in the paper: The archive records that the paper mentions this repository; it is not marked official. community (archive-listed): In the archive's code links for this paper, not marked official and not recorded as mentioned in the paper. found in paper text by Syntology: Syntology found this repository in the paper's own text; whether it is the authors' implementation is not asserted. community: Not in the archive's code links for this paper; a community repository Syntology harvested. Samples from a repository marked official are listed first. Licence labels name the repository's licence as recorded at harvest. “Pointer only” means Syntology does not serve that copy's text, for one of four reasons: no licence file was found; the licence was not identified; the licence is recorded as permissive but that copy's record is not marked cleared; or the licence is outside the permissive list Syntology serves text under (MIT, Apache-2.0, BSD and similar). Some licences outside that list permit redistribution, such as WTFPL, and GPL-3.0 under its conditions; they are simply not on the list. Hover a licence label for the reason. File links open the file on GitHub at the default branch, which may have changed since the harvest.

Tasks

Results from the paper archive 2025-07-28

No leaderboard rows for this paper in the archive.

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