Attention Models in Graphs: A Survey
Open accessAbstract
Graph-structured data arise naturally in many different application domains. By representing data as graphs, we can capture entities (i.e., nodes) as well as their relationships (i.e., edges) with each other. Many useful insights can be derived from graph-structured data as demonstrated by an ever-growing body of work focused on graph mining. However, in the real-world, graphs can be both large - with many complex patterns - and noisy which can pose a problem for effective graph mining. An effective way to deal with this issue is to incorporate "attention" into graph mining solutions. An attention mechanism allows a method to focus on task-relevant parts of the graph, helping it to make better decisions. In this work, we conduct a comprehensive and focused survey of the literature on the emerging field of graph attention models. We introduce three intuitive taxonomies to group existing work. These are based on problem setting (type of input and output), the type of attention mechanism used, and the task (e.g., graph classification, link prediction, etc.). We motivate our taxonomies through detailed examples and use each to survey competing approaches from a unique standpoint. Finally, we highlight several challenges in the area and discuss promising directions for future work.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
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.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Lee et al. conduct a partial survey of GNNs which apply different attention mechanisms.
“Lee et al. [12] conduct a partial survey of GNNs which apply different attention mechanisms.”
From A Comprehensive Survey on Graph Neural Networks (2021) · cites this paper as [12]
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Cited by
Sorted by citations
A Comprehensive Survey on Graph Neural Networks
Wu, Z., Pan, S., Chen, F., Long, G., Zhang, C., & Yu, P. S. (2021) · IEEE Transactions on Neural Networks and Learning Systems · doi:10.1109/tnnls.2020.2978386 · Cited by 11,000 · see citing works
- Authors
- Lee, J. B., Rossi, R. A., Kim, S., Ahmed, N. K., & Koh, E.
- Affiliations
- Worcester Polytechnic Institute (US)
- Adobe Systems (United States) (US)
- Intel (United States) (US)
- Venue
- arXiv
- Publisher
- arXiv
- Published
- 2018
- ISSN
- 2331-8422 (ISSN-L)
- arXiv
- 1807.07984
- OpenAlex
- W2883803180
- Cited by
- 59
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2025: 1 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 6 · 2022: 14 · 2021: 11 · 2020: 15 · 2019: 10
- Type
- posted content
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- arxiv.org
- Locations
- arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
- arXiv (Cornell University)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Advanced Graph Neural Networks
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition › Graph Theory and Algorithms
- Physical Sciences › Physics and Astronomy › Statistical and Nonlinear Physics › Complex Network Analysis Techniques
- Keywords
- attention mechanism, graph mining, graph classification, link prediction, graph neural networks, noisy graphs, large-scale graphs
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