Papers › Replay-and-Forget-Free Graph Class-Incremental Learning: A Task Profiling and...
Replay-and-Forget-Free Graph Class-Incremental Learning: A Task Profiling and Prompting Approach
Chaoxi Niu, Guansong Pang, Ling Chen, Bing Liu
Class-incremental learning (CIL) aims to continually learn a sequence of tasks, with each task consisting of a set of unique classes. Graph CIL (GCIL) follows the same setting but needs to deal with graph tasks (e.g., node classification in a graph). The key characteristic of CIL lies in the absence of task identifiers (IDs) during inference, which causes a significant challenge in separating classes from different tasks (i.e., inter-task class separation). Being able to accurately predict the task IDs can help address this issue, but it is a challenging problem. In this paper, we show theoretically that accurate task ID prediction on graph data can be achieved by a Laplacian smoothing-based graph task profiling approach, in which each graph task is modeled by a task prototype based on Laplacian smoothing over the graph. It guarantees that the task prototypes of the same graph task are nearly the same with a large smoothing step, while those of different tasks are distinct due to differences in graph structure and node attributes. Further, to avoid the catastrophic forgetting of the knowledge learned in previous graph tasks, we propose a novel graph prompting approach for GCIL which learns a small discriminative graph prompt for each task, essentially resulting in a separate classification model for each task. The prompt learning requires the training of a single graph neural network (GNN) only once on the first task, and no data replay is required thereafter, thereby obtaining a GCIL model being both replay-free and forget-free. Extensive experiments on four GCIL benchmarks show that i) our task prototype-based method can achieve 100% task ID prediction accuracy on all four datasets, ii) our GCIL model significantly outperforms state-of-the-art competing methods by at least 18% in average CIL accuracy, and iii) our model is fully free of forgetting on the four datasets.
In Syntology Open this paper in Syntology's Atlas, the map of the papers in Syntology's graph and their citations.
For agents, Syntology's MCP tool lists every function and class Syntology harvested from this paper and whether it ran (how to connect): get_harvested_code_for_paper(arxiv_id="2410.10341")
Code
Syntology Ran 1 of 4 code samples harvested from 1 repository linked to this paper; 3 have no recorded run. Of those that ran: 1 ran with no contract checked.
By repository: official repository: 4 samples from 1 repository, 1 ran. The run record, sample by sample. “Ran” means executed on a synthesized input, not that the code is correct or reproduces the paper.
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
4 samples harvested; 1 ran; 0 honoured the contract we drafted; 3 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 4 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 mala-lab/TPP. “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.
db9df3652df16af3 · report
78ee86b31e2503da · report
ccae8e89877adff4 · report
cecf8d5bf86c6f95 · report
Tasks
Results from the paper archive 2025-07-28
No leaderboard rows for this paper in the archive.
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