cs.LGSep 12, 2026
SavePre-training with Graph Transformers
Organizations: National University of Singapore Singapore · Loyola Marymount University Los Angeles, USA
Abstract
This article investigates pre-training strategies for graph transformers in the biochemistry domain. By conducting comprehensive experiments, the study reveals that supervised pre-training using computed properties as labels provides the highest performance gain on downstream tasks. The results also highlight the importance of constraining model capacity to mitigate overfitting in graph transformers.
Figures & tables
| PRE-TRAINING METHODS | DOWNSTREAM TASKS | |||||||||||
| ID | GNN | Method | Dataset | CLINTOX | MUV | HIV | SIDER | BACE | TOX21 | BBBP | TOXCAST | AVERAGE |
| 1 | GTL - LapPE | - | - | 54.2 | 51.7 | 53.3 | 51.0 | 59.8 | 58.4 | 69.9 | 55.5 | 56.7 |
| 2 | GTM - LapPE | - | - | 55.8 | 52.2 | 56.3 | 56.2 | 69.8 | 61.2 | 72.6 | 57.1 | 60.2 |
| 3 | GTL - RWPE | - | - | 66.3 | 56.1 | 61.9 | 55.0 | 50.9 | 58.1 | 72.5 | 56.5 | 59.7 |
| 4 | GTM - RWPE | - | - | 65.1 | 51.8 | 59.6 | 54.1 | 67.0 | 63.6 | 72.3 | 61.1 | 61.8 |
| 5 | GTL - NoPE | - | - | 64.7 | 52.1 | 61.2 | 51.1 | 63.8 | 52.8 | 68.8 | 59.3 | 59.2 |
Table 1. Test ROC-AUC (%) performance on molecular prediction benchmarks using different pre-training strategies with GT and GIN. The rightmost column averages the mean of test performance across the 8 datasets. The best results for GT and GIN are bolded. The experiments are categorized as follows: experiments 1-8 involve direct training and evaluation of GNN models without any pre-training; experiments 9-13 utilize self-supervised pre-training; experiments 14-31 employ supervised pre-training; and experiments 32-41 utilize combined pre-training. For detailed explanations of the acronyms used, please refer to Section 2.3 .
More in this topic
Graph Transformer
Graph Transformers adapt self-attention to represent relationships, topology, and long-range dependencies in graph-structured data.
See all 101 papers