PreprintCited by 63Advanced Graph Neural NetworksGraph Theory and AlgorithmsComplex Network Analysis Techniques

The DOI matches its DataCite record.

Temporal Graph Benchmark for Machine Learning on Temporal Graphs

Open access

Abstract

We present the Temporal Graph Benchmark (TGB), a collection of challenging and diverse benchmark datasets for realistic, reproducible, and robust evaluation of machine learning models on temporal graphs. TGB datasets are of large scale, spanning years in duration, incorporate both node and edge-level prediction tasks and cover a diverse set of domains including social, trade, transaction, and transportation networks. For both tasks, we design evaluation protocols based on realistic use-cases. We extensively benchmark each dataset and find that the performance of common models can vary drastically across datasets. In addition, on dynamic node property prediction tasks, we show that simple methods often achieve superior performance compared to existing temporal graph models. We believe that these findings open up opportunities for future research on temporal graphs. Finally, TGB provides an automated machine learning pipeline for reproducible and accessible temporal graph research, including data loading, experiment setup and performance evaluation. TGB will be maintained and updated on a regular basis and welcomes community feedback. TGB datasets, data loaders, example codes, evaluation setup, and leaderboards are publicly available at https://tgb.complexdatalab.com/.

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

DataCite · 10.48550/arxiv.2307.01026

Cites

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

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Huang, S., Poursafaei, F., Danovitch, J., Fey, M., Hu, W., Rossi, E., Leskovec, J., Bronstein, M., Rabusseau, G., & Rabbany, R.
Venue
arXiv
Publisher
arXiv
Published
2023
Pages
2056-2073
ISSN
1049-5258 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W7133200245
Cited by
63
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 28 · 2025: 13 · 2024: 20 · 2023: 2
FWCI
9.97
Type
conference paper
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • neural information processing systems (publishedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc)
  • arXiv (Cornell University)
Funders
  • Canadian Institute for Advanced Research
  • Samsung
  • Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
  • Fonds de recherche du Québec – Nature et technologies
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Advanced Graph Neural Networks
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computational Theory and Mathematics › Graph Theory and Algorithms
  • Physical Sciences › Physics and Astronomy › Statistical and Nonlinear Physics › Complex Network Analysis Techniques
Keywords
dynamic graphs, benchmark dataset, temporal graph learning, dynamic networks, temporal link prediction

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