Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 361

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 23 of the 23 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

GraphSMOTE: Imbalanced Node Classification on Graphs with Graph Neural Networks

Open access
Zhao, Tianxiang, Zhang, Xiang, Wang, Suhang·2021·Proceedings of the 14th ACM International Conference on Web Search and Data Mining

Abstract

Node classification is an important research topic in graph learning. Graph neural networks (GNNs) have achieved state-of-the-art performance of node classification. However, existing GNNs address the problem where node samples for different classes are balanced; while for many real-world scenarios, some classes may have much fewer instances than others. Directly training a GNN classifier in this case would under-represent samples from those minority classes and result in sub-optimal performance. Therefore, it is very important to develop GNNs for imbalanced node classification. However, the work on this is rather limited. Hence, we seek to extend previous imbalanced learning techniques for i.i.d data to the imbalanced node classification task to facilitate GNN classifiers. In particular, we choose to adopt synthetic minority over-sampling algorithms, as they are found to be the most effective and stable. This task is non-trivial, as previous synthetic minority over-sampling algorithms fail to provide relation information for newly synthesized samples, which is vital for learning on graphs. Moreover, node attributes are high-dimensional. Directly over-sampling in the original input domain could generates out-of-domain samples, which may impair the accuracy of the classifier. We propose a novel framework, \method, in which an embedding space is constructed to encode the similarity among the nodes. New samples are synthesize in this space to assure genuineness. In addition, an edge generator is trained simultaneously to model the relation information, and provide it for those new samples. This framework is general and can be easily extended into different variations. The proposed framework is evaluated using three different datasets, and it outperforms all baselines with a large margin.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1145/3437963.3441720

Cites

23 of 23 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 23 references

Cited by

See all 361

Metadata

Authors
Zhao, T., Zhang, X., & Wang, S.
Venue
Proceedings of the 14th ACM International Conference on Web Search and Data Mining
Publisher
ACM
Published
2021-03-08
Pages
833-841
OpenAlex
W3134509497
Cited by
361
References
23
FWCI
25.54
Type
conference paper
Language
en
Open access
green

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: GraphSMOTE: Imbalanced Node Classification on Graphs with Graph Neural Networks. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1145/3437963.3441720
The paper
Zhao, T., Zhang, X., & Wang, S. (2021). GraphSMOTE: Imbalanced Node Classification on Graphs with Graph Neural Networks. Proceedings of the 14th ACM International Conference on Web Search and Data Mining. https://doi.org/10.1145/3437963.3441720

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.