Share your thoughts, 1 month free Claude Pro on usSee more
WorkDL logo mark

Less is More: Towards Simple Graph Contrastive Learning

About

Graph Contrastive Learning (GCL) has shown strong promise for unsupervised graph representation learning, yet its effectiveness on heterophilic graphs, where connected nodes often belong to different classes, remains limited. Most existing methods rely on complex augmentation schemes, intricate encoders, or negative sampling, which raises the question of whether such complexity is truly necessary in this challenging setting. In this work, we revisit the foundations of supervised and unsupervised learning on graphs and uncover a simple yet effective principle for GCL: mitigating node feature noise by aggregating it with structural features derived from the graph topology. This observation suggests that the original node features and the graph structure naturally provide two complementary views for contrastive learning. Building on this insight, we propose an embarrassingly simple GCL model that uses a GCN encoder to capture structural features and an MLP encoder to isolate node feature noise. Our design requires neither data augmentation nor negative sampling, yet achieves state-of-the-art results on heterophilic benchmarks with minimal computational and memory overhead, while also offering advantages in homophilic graphs in terms of complexity, scalability, and robustness. We provide theoretical justification for our approach and validate its effectiveness through extensive experiments, including robustness evaluations against both black-box and white-box adversarial attacks.

Yanan Zhao, Feng Ji, Jingyang Dai, Jiaze Ma, Wee Peng Tay• 2025

Related benchmarks

TaskDatasetResultRank
Graph ClassificationPROTEINS
Accuracy75.41
994
Node ClassificationCiteseer
Accuracy70.12
931
Node ClassificationPubmed
Accuracy79
819
Node ClassificationChameleon
Accuracy46.01
640
Node ClassificationWisconsin
Accuracy85.29
627
Node ClassificationTexas
Accuracy0.7838
616
Node ClassificationSquirrel
Accuracy43.89
591
Node ClassificationCornell
Accuracy73.78
582
Node ClassificationActor
Accuracy36.79
397
Node ClassificationPhoto
Mean Accuracy93.41
343
Showing 10 of 18 rows

Other info

Follow for update