Search arXivSearch

arXiv · 2503.04822

HeTGB: A Comprehensive Benchmark for Heterophilic Text-Attributed Graphs

Abstract

Graph neural networks (GNNs) have demonstrated success in modeling relational data primarily under the assumption of homophily. However, many real-world graphs exhibit heterophily, where linked nodes belong to different categories or possess diverse attributes, such as webpages, Wikipedia articles, social networks, and e-commerce platforms. Additionally, nodes in many domains are associated with textual descriptions, forming heterophilic text-attributed graphs (TAGs). Despite their significance, heterophilic TAGs remain underexplored due to the lack of dedicated benchmarks that jointly capture heterophilic structures and rich textual attributes. To address this gap, we introduce the \textbf{He}terophilic \textbf{T}ext-attributed \textbf{G}raph \textbf{B}enchmark (HeTGB), a novel benchmark comprising five real-world heterophilic graph datasets from diverse domains, with nodes enriched by extensive textual descriptions. HeTGB enables systematic evaluation of GNNs, pre-trained language models (PLMs) and co-training methods on the node classification task. Through extensive benchmarking experiments, we showcase the utility of text attributes in heterophilic graphs, analyze the challenges posed by heterophilic TAGs and the limitations of existing models, and provide insights into the interplay between graph structures and textual attributes.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

BibTeXRIS

Shujie Li, Yuxia Wu, Yuan Fang, Chuan Shi. 2026-08-30. HeTGB: A Comprehensive Benchmark for Heterophilic Text-Attributed Graphs. https://arxiv.org/abs/2503.04822

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

Discover connections

Connections use source metadata and explicit phrase matches, not verified experimental comparisons.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related discoveries

When Robots Mishear Us: Mapping the Safety Risks of Voice-Controlled Embodied AI

We investigate whether automatic speech recognition (ASR) errors in user input can lead to unsafe outputs from Embodied AI (EAI) models. We find that ASR errors can lead to harmful instructions being accepted and executed by EAI models, thereby reducing safety. We simulate ASR errors and combine them with existing safety benchmarks (SafeAgentBench and POEX) to evaluate how different errors affect embodied AI safety. We find that some of them preserve semantic structure but increase harmful ambiguity, while others weaken the model refusal behaviour and allow unsafe plans to be generated and executed. We show that in some cases automatic correction of ASR errors can reduce the risk, but this is not always effective. Overall, we show that ASR errors lead to significant safety risks for embodied AI.

cs.AI

Sleight of Word Benchmark: Can Language Models Notice If Their Own Output Was Tampered With?

The output of a Language Model can be tampered with \emph{while} the model is writing it. A simple test can thus be constructed by evaluating the model's perception of this external perturbation. In this spirit, a simple benchmark is built in which a single word is consistently substituted with another in the generation process. We call this method \emph{Sleight of Word}. Two distinct axes are measured: metrics that relate to the model's surprise, as well as an evaluation of the textual reaction for 19 different open-weight language models.

cs.CL

TCS-BENCH: Benchmarking State-of-the-Art Generative AI Theoretical Computer Science Research Ability

We introduce TCS-Bench, a benchmark for evaluating Large Language Models (LLMs) on research-level Theoretical Computer Science (TCS) proof generation. TCS-Bench consists of theorem-proving tasks from papers published at top theoretical computer science venues (STOC, FOCS, and SODA). Each task provides the necessary context to derive a self-contained proof for a target result. We evaluate state-of-the-art models on this benchmark. We verify the correctness of generated proofs via a verification agent, and further benchmark the verifier against human-expert proof judgements on a set of target statements and generated proofs pairs. Our reference verifier achieves over 90% accuracy on the expert labeled set.

cs.CL