Papers › View-Consistent Heterogeneous Network on Graphs With Few Labeled Nodes
View-Consistent Heterogeneous Network on Graphs With Few Labeled Nodes
Liao, Zhuolin; Zhang, Xiaolin ; Su, Wei; Zhan, Kun;
Performing transductive learning on graphs with very few labeled data, that is, two or three samples for each category, is challenging due to the lack of supervision. In the existing work, self-supervised learning via a single view model is widely adopted to address the problem. However, recent observation shows multiview representations of an object share the same semantic information in high-level feature space. For each sample, we generate heterogeneous representations and use view-consistency loss to make their representations consistent with each other. Multiview representation also inspires to supervise the pseudolabels generation by the aid of mutual supervision between views. In this article, we thus propose a view-consistent heterogeneous network (VCHN) to learn better representations by aligning view-agnostic semantics. Specifically, VCHN is constructed by constraining the predictions between two views so that the view pairs can supervise each other. To make the best use of cross-view information, we further propose a novel training strategy to generate more reliable pseudolabels, which thus enhances predictions of the VCHN. Extensive experimental results on three benchmark datasets demonstrate that our method achieves superior performance over state-of-the-art methods under very low label rates.
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 | CiteSeer (0.5%) | VCHN | Accuracy | 65.6% | #2 of 14 | Archive leaderboard | report |
| Node Classification | CiteSeer (1%) | VCHN | Accuracy | 70.1% | #1 of 14 | Archive leaderboard | report |
| Node Classification | Cora (0.5%) | VCHN | Accuracy | 74.9% | #2 of 15 | Archive leaderboard | report |
| Node Classification | Cora (1%) | VHCN | Accuracy | 78.1% | #3 of 15 | Archive leaderboard | report |
| Node Classification | Cora (3%) | VCHN | Accuracy | 83.1% | #2 of 15 | Archive leaderboard | report |
| Node Classification | PubMed (0.03%) | VCHN | Accuracy | 71.8% | #1 of 14 | Archive leaderboard | report |
| Node Classification | PubMed (0.05%) | VCHN | Accuracy | 74.3% | #1 of 14 | Archive leaderboard | report |
| Node Classification | PubMed (0.1%) | VCHN | Accuracy | 76.8% | #2 of 14 | 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