Papers › Rethinking Kernel Methods for Node Representation Learning on Graphs
Rethinking Kernel Methods for Node Representation Learning on Graphs
Yu Tian, Long Zhao, Xi Peng, Dimitris N. Metaxas
Graph kernels are kernel methods measuring graph similarity and serve as a standard tool for graph classification. However, the use of kernel methods for node classification, which is a related problem to graph representation learning, is still ill-posed and the state-of-the-art methods are heavily based on heuristics. Here, we present a novel theoretical kernel-based framework for node classification that can bridge the gap between these two representation learning problems on graphs. Our approach is motivated by graph kernel methodology but extended to learn the node representations capturing the structural information in a graph. We theoretically show that our formulation is as powerful as any positive semidefinite kernels. To efficiently learn the kernel, we propose a novel mechanism for node feature aggregation and a data-driven similarity metric employed during the training phase. More importantly, our framework is flexible and complementary to other graph-based deep learning models, e.g., Graph Convolutional Networks (GCNs). We empirically evaluate our approach on a number of standard node classification benchmarks, and demonstrate that our model sets the new state of the art.
In Syntology Open this paper in Syntology's Atlas, the map of the papers in Syntology's graph and their citations.
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Link Prediction | Citeseer | Node Feature Agg + Similarity Metric | AP | 91.8% | #11 of 13 | Archive leaderboard | report |
| Link Prediction | Citeseer | Node Feature Agg + Similarity Metric | AUC | 90.9% | #11 of 13 | Archive leaderboard | report |
| Link Prediction | Cora | BANE | AP | 93.2% | #9 of 13 | Archive leaderboard | report |
| Link Prediction | Cora | BANE | AUC | 93.50% | #9 of 13 | Archive leaderboard | report |
| Link Prediction | Pubmed | Node Feature Agg + Similarity Metric | AP | 94.2% | #10 of 13 | Archive leaderboard | report |
| Link Prediction | Pubmed | Node Feature Agg + Similarity Metric | AUC | 94.5% | #10 of 13 | 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