cs.LGAug 11, 2026

AutoGrable: What Is a Good Graph for a Table?

Authors: Tamara CucumidesFloris Geerts

Abstract

Graph learning presupposes a graph, and tables and relational databases do not come with one. Applying a GNN to them requires deciding which entities become nodes, which of them to connect, and through which relations---a decision made by hand, by schema heuristics, or by training a model on every candidate graph and keeping the best. We give a criterion that requires no trained graph model. In the minimal table-to-graph abstraction each row is a node, so a message-passing GNN, bounded by 1-WL, sees a construction only as a partition of the rows into colour-refinement classes: a construction is good for a task when that partition separates rows with different labels and does not split rows that share one. AutoGrable turns this criterion into a construction procedure. For incidence constructions the partition is fixed by the selected columns, so building a graph reduces to choosing them, and we score a candidate subset by a label-alignment risk: the held-out risk of the best predictor constant on its blocks, penalised by an occupancy term measuring how thinly the blocks are populated. The score materialises no graph and trains no GNN, so AutoGrable can search the space of subsets greedily and cheaply, and returns the resulting grable for single tables and for foreign-key schemas alike. Our experiments show that over a space of candidate graphs the score discards a large fraction while retaining the best; that AutoGrable recovers the columns that generate the label on controlled tasks and outperforms fixed, random, and task-aware constructors on real tasks under a fixed predictor; and that it is the only method compared that can decline to build a graph when none helps.

Explore similar work

May 20, 2026cs.LG

Is Fixing Schema Graphs Necessary? Full-Resolution Graph Structure Learning for Relational Deep Learning

Relational prediction tasks are fundamental in many real-world applications, where data are naturally stored in relational databases (RDBs). Relational Deep Learning (RDL) addresses this problem by modeling RDBs as graphs and applying graph neural networks (GNNs) for end-to-end learning. However, the full-resolution property is commonly adopted as a design principle in graph construction for RDBs to preserve relational semantics, which leads most existing methods to rely on fixed graph structures. In this paper, we propose FROG, a Full-Resolution and Optimizable Graph Structure Learning} framework for RDL that formulates relational structure learning as a learnable table role modeling problem, allowing tables to contribute as nodes and edges in message passing. We further design role-driven message passing mechanisms to capture relational semantics, enabling joint optimization of graph structure and GNN representations. To ensure semantic consistency, we introduce functional dependency constraints that regularize representations across table and entity levels. Extensive experiments demonstrate that our method outperforms existing approaches and reveal how table roles impact downstream tasks, offering new insights into graph construction for RDL
Yi Huang, Qingyun Sun, Jia Li +2
Jun 2, 2026cs.AI

RelGT-AC: A Relational Graph Transformer for Autocomplete Tasks in Relational Databases

Relational databases underpin modern enterprise, scientific, and healthcare systems, yet predictive machine learning on such data remains challenging due to their multi-table, heterogeneous, and temporal structure. Relational Deep Learning (RDL) addresses this by representing databases as heterogeneous graphs and applying graph neural networks (GNNs) directly. RelBench v2 recently introduced autocomplete tasks -- a practically motivated task type where the goal is to predict an existing column value from relational context, analogous to an intelligent form-filling assistant. We propose RelGT-AC (Relational Graph Transformer for Autocomplete), extending the RelGT architecture with three targeted contributions: (1) a column masking strategy that prevents trivial solutions by masking the target column during subgraph encoding; (2) a unified task head supporting binary classification, multiclass classification, and regression autocomplete tasks within a single model; and (3) a TF-IDF text encoder that automatically detects and encodes free-text columns, recovering strong lexical signal that categorical encoders discard. Across 7 tasks spanning 3 RelBench v2 datasets (rel-trial, rel-f1, rel-stack), RelGT-AC outperforms the GraphSAGE baseline on all 3 regression autocomplete tasks and achieves up to +10 AUROC points on text-heavy eligibility tasks via the TF-IDF encoder.
Phillip Jiang
Jun 7, 2026cs.AI

What Makes a Desired Graph for Relational Deep Learning?

Relational deep learning (RDL) converts relational databases (RDBs) into heterogeneous graphs, but graphs derived directly from database schemas are often not well suited for how graph neural networks (GNNs) perform relational reasoning. We study what makes a relational graph suitable for deep learning and show that schema-derived graphs suffer from two systematic failures: information overload and semantic fragmentation. Our empirical analysis reveals that the desired graph is not the raw schema, but a result of controlled structural adaptation. Performance depends on balancing two operations: mitigating information overload via filtering, and repairing semantic fragmentation via injection. Specifically, filtering serves as a bias-variance knob with non-monotonic effects, while injection improves performance only when it explicitly restores the relational dependencies missing from the original schema. Based on these findings, we develop an end-to-end structural optimizer that applies both operations to adapt relational graphs automatically. Across 26 tasks spanning classification, regression, and recommendation, the optimized graphs consistently improve accuracy while often reducing inference cost.
Yao Cheng, Siqiang Luo