跳到正文
研踪PaperTrail
← 研踪 PaperTrail

arXiv:2611.03433 · v1

A Living Leaderboard for Graph Machine Learning

首次提交 2026-11-03 00:53
版本更新 2026-11-03 00:53
雷达观测 2026-11-04 23:41
arXiv ↗PDF ↗

摘要

Graph machine learning benchmarking results are scattered across papers that use quite different sets of datasets and baseline methods, making it difficult to tell whether a reported gain reflects architectural progress or merely an outdated comparison or weakly tuned baseline. We introduce a living, graph-learning-specific leaderboard that organizes reported results by dataset, putting new results into context. As of 15 October 2026 our LLM-based extraction pipeline extracted 27,723 eligible results across 111 datasets from 885 peer-reviewed papers. Our analysis of these results quantifies concerns about graph-learning benchmarking: legacy datasets are still actively used and many result tables contain baseline results that are drastically lower than those already available in the literature, e.g. 45% Amazon-ratings tables and 37% for Peptides-struct. The leaderboard allows to quickly compare new results against compatible prior results, aiming to improve the overall quality of graph learning benchmarking.

作者备注:The leaderboard is available at https://graphlearningbenchmarks.github.io , the code at https://github.com/martinalex000/benchmarking_website

AI 论文解读

基于摘要 · 非全文审阅

此版本尚未生成 AI 解读。解读由后台任务生成并按论文版本保存,登录后共享已有结果。

版本差异

目前只观测到一个版本,无法比较变化。之后收录新版本时,会在这里对照标题、作者、分类和摘要。

观测到的版本

相邻记录可能跳过中间版本;首次发现 v2 及以上也会标为版本更新。

v1 · 2026-11-03 00:53 · 最新观测版本

A Living Leaderboard for Graph Machine Learning

Graph machine learning benchmarking results are scattered across papers that use quite different sets of datasets and baseline methods, making it difficult to tell whether a reported gain reflects architectural progress or merely an outdated comparison or weakly tuned baseline. We introduce a living, graph-learning-specific leaderboard that organizes reported results by dataset, putting new results into context. As of 15 October 2026 our LLM-based extraction pipeline extracted 27,723 eligible results across 111 datasets from 885 peer-reviewed papers. Our analysis of these results quantifies concerns about graph-learning benchmarking: legacy datasets are still actively used and many result tables contain baseline results that are drastically lower than those already available in the literature, e.g. 45% Amazon-ratings tables and 37% for Peptides-struct. The leaderboard allows to quickly compare new results against compatible prior results, aiming to improve the overall quality of graph learning benchmarking.

查看此版本解读 →查看此版本原文 ↗