Link sign prediction (LSP) aims to infer the positive or negative polarity of unobserved links in signed networks. Signed Graph Neural Networks (SGNNs) usually rely on signed-graph structural priors, including structural balance and homophily-like similarity, to guide message passing and prediction. These priors describe population-level tendencies, not guarantees for individual target edges. Their failures are especially costly under severe sign imbalance, where errors on minority and locally conflicting relations are harder to detect and correct. We propose Polarity-Asymmetric Structural Calibration (PASC), a target-edge structural-prior calibration framework for signed link prediction. PASC constructs a structure-only prior representation, estimates a target-edge structural prior score, and compares this score with a local signed-context cue to derive a conflict residual. The residual calibrates signed attention aggregation, target-edge gated fusion, and regime-adaptive optimization. Experiments on five real-world signed network datasets show that PASC consistently achieves the best Macro-F1 among representative baselines, with competitive AUC, Binary-F1, and Micro-F1. Structural-shift experiments further suggest reduced dependence on dense-neighborhood and local-closure shortcuts. Source code is available at https://github.com/iqqGGGGGGG/PASC-for-LSP.
Figures & tables
Fig. 1: Example of target-edge structural-prior unreliability. Alice and Carol share a positive neighbor Bob, so structural balance suggests a positive relation. Their local signed context, however, may provide conflicting evidence. Structural priors capture population-level tendencies but need not be reliable for every target edge.
Triads
Prior
(+,+)
(+,−)/(−,+)
(−,−)
Posterior
+
−
+
−
+
−
Datasets
Bitcoin-Alpha
95.7%
4.3%
63.5%
36.5%
86.6%
13.4%
Bitcoin-OTC
95.9%
4.1%
39.3%
60.7%
90.2%
9.8%
Wiki-RfA
88.1%
11.9%
70.8%
29.2%
66.9%
33.1%
Slashdot
94.9%
5.1%
46.5%
53.5%
68.5%
31.5%
Epinions
96.5%
3.5%
53.5%
46.5%
69.7%
30.3%
TABLE I: Prior-Posterior Statistics of Triangles in Signed Networks
Fig. 2: Architecture of the PASC framework for link sign prediction. PASC estimates target-edge structural prior scores, derives conflict residuals from local signed-context cues, and uses residual-guided aggregation, regime-adaptive conflict-residual optimization (PASC-S and PASC-H), and target-edge gated fusion to calibrate structural reliance under different graph regimes.
Dataset
Nodes
Edges
Pos links
Neg links
Pos/Neg
Bitcoin-Alpha 1
3,782
24,185
22,649
1,536
14.7:1
Bitcoin-OTC 1
5,881
35,591
32,028
3,563
9.0:1
Wiki-RfA 1
11,259
178,096
138,813
39,283
3.5:1
Slashdot 1
84,140
549,201
425,071
124,130
3.4:1
Epinions 1
131,827
841,371
717,667
123,704
5.8:1
TABLE II: Statistics of the datasets used in our experiments.
Dataset
Metrics
nSNE
SGCN
SNEA
SDGNN
RSGNN
SPMF
TrustSGCN
CFSE
PASC
Bitcoin-Alpha
AUC
84.25 ± 2.72
88.57 ± 0.19
89.20 ± 1.60
90.29 ± 1.27
79.68 ± 0.71
90.15 ± 0.28
86.72 ± 0.93
93.37 ± 0.40
93.61 ± 0.53
Binary-F1
94.07 ± 5.01
97.07 ± 0.05
93.60 ± 0.47
97.23 ± 0.30
94.81 ± 0.08
97.15 ± 0.11
97.00 ± 0.04
97.81 ± 0.02
97.85 ± 0.03
Micro-F1
89.37 ± 8.30
94.35 ± 0.11
88.55 ± 0.81
94.75 ± 0.58
90.56 ± 0.15
94.61 ± 0.21
94.30 ± 0.06
95.84 ± 0.04
95.95 ± 0.06
Macro-F1
57.76 ± 9.71
60.28 ± 0.92
69.44 ± 1.61
72.91 ± 4.32
71.18 ± 0.49
73.24 ± 0.11
69.00 ± 0.93
79.75 ± 0.32
81.30 ± 0.36
Bitcoin-OTC
AUC
90.02 ± 0.97
91.63 ± 0.09
87.90 ± 0.68
89.69 ± 1.12
81.04 ± 0.30
89.33 ± 0.40
88.92 ± 0.54
95.00 ± 0.81
94.98 ± 0.04
Binary-F1
96.25 ± 0.42
96.21 ± 0.13
92.31 ± 0.57
95.97 ± 0.33
92.69 ± 0.27
95.77 ± 0.03
95.57 ± 0.28
97.34 ± 0.11
97.53 ± 0.13
TABLE III: Performance comparison on five real-world datasets (mean ± standard deviation). The PASC column reports the variant chosen by the pre-defined training-graph rule used in Fig. 3 .
Fig. 3: Variant Adaptability comparison of PASC-S and PASC-H under different signed-topology regimes.
Fig. 4: Ablation study of PASC. Panels (a) and (b) report the degradation ( Δ% ) in AUC and Macro-F1 when each component is removed.
Fig. 5: Sensitivity analysis of λ1 and λ2 on Wiki-RfA and Slashdot, showing stable AUC and Macro-F1 across loss-weight settings.
Dataset
Metrics
nSNE
SGCN
SNEA
SDGNN
RSGNN
SPMF
TrustSGCN
CFSE
PASC
Bitcoin-Alpha
AUC
69.53 ± 2.93
80.60 ± 1.58
83.10 ± 0.70
80.71 ± 0.81
74.31 ± 0.04
83.40 ± 0.54
79.89 ± 0.23
77.94 ± 1.39
84.52 ± 0.17
Macro-F1
49.80 ± 1.97
54.89 ± 6.16
70.17 ± 0.58
63.19 ± 3.48
66.61 ± 0.83
71.16 ± 0.19
59.46 ± 1.93
60.92 ± 2.22
72.05 ± 0.35
Bitcoin-OTC
AUC
76.48 ± 7.61
88.01 ± 0.10
85.46 ± 0.10
87.01 ± 0.13
79.34 ± 0.18
88.10 ± 0.35
87.77 ± 0.09
78.26 ± 5.80
89.09 ± 0.03
Macro-F1
53.46 ± 7.69
75.71 ± 0.14
74.66 ± 0.28
75.67 ± 0.11
71.61 ± 0.28
76.75 ± 0.25
74.26 ± 0.20
68.10 ± 3.47
80.06 ± 0.26
Wiki-RfA
AUC
69.46 ± 1.30
78.81 ± 1.19
79.36 ± 0.16
77.27 ± 0.87
66.62 ± 1.17
78.84 ± 0.15
77.08 ± 3.01
72.25 ± 4.89
79.70 ± 0.13
Macro-F1
50.08 ± 9.25
67.02 ± 1.25
66.13 ± 0.05
69.23 ± 0.21
53.81 ± 0.62
69.23 ± 0.18
65.48 ± 3.83
62.83 ± 1.48
69.24 ± 0.21
TABLE IV: Performance comparison under the Degree-Shift structural-shift protocol. For space, structural-shift tables report AUC and Macro-F1. Binary-F1 and Micro-F1 show similar trends and are omitted.
Dataset
Metrics
nSNE
SGCN
SNEA
SDGNN
RSGNN
SPMF
TrustSGCN
CFSE
PASC
Bitcoin-Alpha
AUC
66.02 ± 5.45
79.98 ± 0.70
79.17 ± 0.87
79.77 ± 1.50
73.37 ± 0.35
79.00 ± 0.43
80.09 ± 2.12
76.10 ± 1.27
81.67 ± 0.15
Macro-F1
49.44 ± 1.68
60.74 ± 1.07
65.82 ± 0.62
62.49 ± 3.51
62.19 ± 0.11
65.48 ± 0.49
60.38 ± 2.60
59.48 ± 1.97
67.53 ± 0.38
Bitcoin-OTC
AUC
73.00 ± 2.18
83.86 ± 0.21
82.79 ± 2.38
83.87 ± 0.21
76.38 ± 0.02
83.20 ± 0.95
84.05 ± 0.21
80.66 ± 1.99
85.33 ± 0.10
Macro-F1
59.85 ± 5.63
70.81 ± 0.71
72.80 ± 1.57
69.35 ± 0.45
69.68 ± 0.21
71.84 ± 0.47
65.48 ± 0.93
69.90 ± 0.92
74.36 ± 0.54
Wiki-RfA
AUC
80.28 ± 2.19
80.52 ± 0.10
84.12 ± 0.20
81.99 ± 0.62
71.48 ± 0.10
80.95 ± 0.07
80.47 ± 0.71
83.00 ± 0.87
84.19 ± 0.23
Macro-F1
44.53 ± 4.91
69.06 ± 2.20
75.08 ± 0.28
71.66 ± 0.68
71.91 ± 0.32
73.66 ± 0.07
64.89 ± 0.39
73.95 ± 0.82
75.28 ± 0.51
TABLE V: Performance comparison under the Structural-Shortcut-Shift structural-shift protocol. For space, structural-shift tables report AUC and Macro-F1. Binary-F1 and Micro-F1 show similar trends and are omitted.
While signed social recommendation has shown great potential by modeling both trust and distrust relations, its effectiveness is often hindered by structural noise and data sparsity. In this work, we first identify a fundamental inconsistency across the structural, propagation, and semantic layers of existing models, which leads to biased representations learned from sparse or noisy datasets. Furthermore, we observe that most existing methods treat the observed graph as fixed, failing to bridge the gap between noisy topologies and reliable social semantics. To address these issues, we propose a unified framework named SSC-Loop that treats signed social recommendation as the maximization of structural consistency. SSC-Loop includes three dedicated modules: ESA-DA for structural consistency, a P/N/O propagation mechanism for propagation consistency, and a contrastive learning objective for semantic consistency. Experiments on Epinions demonstrate that SSC-Loop achieves strong performance on explicit signed social rating prediction, while auxiliary results on Slashdot under a derived link-existence setting further suggest its ability to exploit signed social structures. Source code is available at https://github.com/Refrainwww/SSC-Loop.
Zifan Wang, Siyu Chen, Wenzhuo Song
Northeast Normal University, Changchun, Jilin, China
Signed graphs arise in trust--distrust networks, financial correlation systems, biological interaction graphs, and many other domains in which edges can be positive or negative and may also be directed. While signed graph neural networks have improved task-specific learning, graph transfer learning on signed graphs remains underdeveloped. In this paper, we introduce TopoSIGN, a pioneer topology-guided graph pre-training and prompt learning framework for signed graphs. TopoSIGN combines a structural encoder built on the magnetic signed Laplacian with a novel persistent-homology branch that summarizes signed topology through Dowker-complex persistence images. The fused embeddings are then transferred to a prompt learning function. Experimental results on synthetic and real-world datasets demonstrate the efficacy of TopoSIGN in extracting useful structural information in signed graphs, as well as the adaptability and flexibility of the proposed general framework.
Zihan Mei, Rong Pan, Yuzhou Chen +1
Arizona State University · University of California, Riverside
Temporal signed networks (TSNs) model the time evolution of cooperative and adversarial relationships that arise in applications such as social media analysis, trust and reputation systems, and financial transaction networks. While graph neural networks (GNNs) perform well for static or unsigned link prediction, effective learning in temporal signed graphs remains challenging due to the interaction of signed relations, evolving structure, and balance-theoretic constraints. To address this gap, we propose a modular temporal enhancement framework for signed GNNs that integrates historical context into otherwise static architectures. The framework introduces a Historical Context Integration Module (HCIM) that combines learnable recency-aware temporal weighting, LSTM-based embedding trajectory modeling, and multi-head temporal attention to capture both short- and long-term signed interaction dynamics. Historical information is fused with current node representations using either global or node-adaptive weighting, allowing the architecture-agnostic framework to accommodate heterogeneous temporal behaviors. We instantiate the approach on the Self-Explainable Signed Graph Transformer (SE-SGformer), preserving interpretability while extending it with temporal awareness. Experiments on real-world and synthetic TSNs, including Bitcoin OTC, Bitcoin Alpha, Reddit, and small-world network models, demonstrate consistent and statistically significant improvements over the static baseline.