Graph foundation models need a discrete token representation, but casting a graph as a generatable token sequence faces a structural obstacle: edges spanning beyond the serialization window cannot be emitted in one pass--so one-pass autoregressive generators systematically under-produce cycles--and a single global condition cannot tell candidate edges apart. GraphVQ removes both obstacles: node contexts--features plus a local edge mask under multi-order breadth-first serialization--are quantized into a shared codebook by a VQ-VAE with BCE-calibrated Bernoulli edge decoding, and a second-stage structure-aware decoder emits the global adjacency conditioned on token-derived pair features, whose necessity over any global-summary condition is formalized in a scoped impossibility result. The tokenizer reconstructs node features at 0.86--0.99 accuracy and decodes local edges at AUROC >= 0.89 (ECE <= 0.007). Under one same-split protocol on four datasets, pair conditioning improves orbit MMD 0.248 -> 0.174 on PROTEINS and 3.4x on a ring stress test, and vanishes on a random-label control--the signature of attribute--topology coupling--so the gain is claimed exactly where attributes carry edge-relevant signal. GraphVQ ranks first among learned generators on PROTEINS, ties for first on SYN-COMM, and improves orbit MMD 2.7--17x over one-stage generation on three datasets, with seed-level bootstrap intervals confirming the rankings are not seed noise; on MUTAG the unweighted edge target under-generates and is reported as such. These results locate the structural control of autoregressive graph generation in the granularity of the condition: pair-level token context turns a quantized vocabulary into a usable capacity axis for distribution-faithful graph generation and future token-level pretraining.
Figures & tables
Figure 1: The three stages of GraphVQ . Stage 1 (training): the graph is serialized in BFS order (random roots/tie-breaking, multi-order augmentation); each node context ci —one-hot features plus an edge mask over the preceding W nodes—is encoded, quantized to the nearest codebook entry (the discrete token), and decoded into features and BCE-calibrated edge probabilities. Stage 2 (training): a GRU prior factorizes the token sequence. Stage 3 (inference): Stage A samples node tokens and decodes features; Stage B builds per-pair features rij , chunks the upper triangle into B -bit groups, and autoregressively emits each chunk from a GRU whose input pools the chunk’s pair features; padding bits are forced to zero and the symmetrized matrix is the generated graph. Solid arrows: forward flow; dashed: training objectives.
Datasets (deg / clu / orb / spc MMD, conn)
Method
MUTAG
PROTEINS
SYN-RING-ROLE
SYN-COMM
One-stage
.331/.928/.729/.105/.65 (6.60)
.275/ .755 /.474/.047/.67 (4.30)
.108/.032/.079/.069/.82 (4.00)
.067/.076/.150/.092/.28 (5.10)
Continuous
.297/.871/ .437 / .090 /.13 (3.20)
.281/1.142/.304/ .039 /.38 (4.15)
.287/.400/.159/.064/.74 (6.40)
.791/.502/.665/.074/1.00 (8.90)
Raw
.414/.895/.605/ .081 /.09 (5.60)
.182 /1.031/.209/ .044 /.67 (3.15)
.017 / .011 / .014 /.042/.50 (2.65)
.006 / .022 / .013 /.051/.36 (2.40)
GraphRNN
.313/ .850 / .401 / .090 /.17 (2.95)
.198/1.070/.301/.059/.44 (4.40)
.177/.623/.148/.038/.92 (5.85)
.066/.029/.211/ .010 /.72 (3.50)
GRAN
.344/.904/.592/.117/.92 (6.30)
.446/1.125/.449/.079/.85 (6.75)
.333/.448/.206/ .018 /.99 (5.35)
.340/.146/.499/.028/.96 (5.70)
Table 1: Same-split generation quality: mean over five seeds, 10,000 samples per seed; MMD = kernel MMD 2 (median bandwidth, identical for all methods); conn. = connectivity. Mean rank is the pre-registered primary metric over degree/clustering/orbit/spectral MMDs (ten methods, resample floor excluded, average ranks for ties; block rank sums verify to 55 ). Bold = best, underline = second-best per MMD column; ties share the mark.
Appendix figures & tables18 assets
Supplementary material from the paper’s appendix.
Appendix
Symbol
Meaning
G=(V,E,X) , N
graph, node set, feature matrix X , size
A , π
adjacency matrix; BFS order of nodes
ci=[xi;ei]
node context: features xi + local edge mask ei
W , K
edge-mask window; codebook size
E={e1,…,eK}
codebook, entries ej∈Rh
t1,…,tn
token sequence of a graph, SOS/EOS-wrapped
Appendix
Table A.1: Key notation.
Figure B.1: Condition dependence of the trained Stage-B decoder on held-out MUTAG graphs (unweighted target). Removing the condition raises positive-edge NLL 1.836→1.879 and globally shuffling the pair features raises it to 2.086 ( +13.6% ); permuting pair features within a chunk changes nothing—the chunk pool is a masked mean.
Figure B.2: Edge coverage of the BFS serialization window as a function of W , versus random orderings, on the TUD benchmarks (MUTAG/ENZYMES/PROTEINS/NCI1). BFS keeps edges local ( ≥93% coverage at W=8 and ≥98% at W=16 ); the uncovered remainder—long-span edges—breaks the cycles and motifs that contain them, motivating Stage B.
Figure B.3: Representable edge fraction of the BFS serialization window versus random orderings on the generation benchmarks (random-root BFS, five orders averaged). BFS keeps ≥88% of edges within W=8 and 0.98 – 1.00 within W=16 ; the residual long-span edges are what one-stage generation cannot emit.
Figure B.4: The condition’s value is dataset-dependent. An independently trained unconditional decoder matches the conditioned one on MUTAG and SYN-RING-ROLE but loses by 1.6× on PROTEINS and 9× on SYN-COMM (orbit MMD, log scale; connectivity on the right).
Figure B.5: Edge NLL (nats/bit) of held-out graphs under three Stage B conditions: oracle (true-feature tokens), reconstructed (deterministic Stage-A reconstruction), and generated (one prior sample). The oracle-to-generated gap is ≤0.009 nats/bit on MUTAG/PROTEINS and substantially larger on the synthetic benchmarks, where the token prior’s samples diverge most from true conditions. The gap alone is not a transfer certification—a decoder that ignored its condition would show the same pattern—so condition-dependence controls accompany it (Sec. 4 ).
Figure B.6: Weighted BCE re-targets density rather than calibrating probability. The optimum of the weighted loss is q∗=wp/(wp+1−p) (red curve), so w=3 fits a true edge probability of 0.1 by 0.25 ; the fitted model (red dot) and its Bernoulli sampling rate (star) track q∗ , not the true p . Unweighted BCE stays on the diagonal (blue).
Figure B.7: Degree distributions of training graphs versus generated samples on MUTAG (unweighted Stage-B). Probability mass shifts toward low degrees relative to training (connectivity 0.11 vs. 1.00 ), the honest cost of the unweighted edge target reported in Table 1 .
Figure B.8: Qualitative samples on MUTAG: training graphs (top row; node colors denote labels), one-stage generation (middle), and GraphVQ two-stage generation with the unweighted edge target (bottom). Two-stage decoding restores denser motifs than one-stage sampling; residual under-generation remains (cf. connectivity 0.11 in Table 1 ).
Dataset
#Graphs
Avg. ∣V∣
Avg. ∣E∣
Feat. dim
Labels
MUTAG
188
17.9
19.8
7
random
PROTEINS
1113
39.1
72.8
3
random
SYN-RING-ROLE
400
10–30
—
4
role-corr.
SYN-RING
400
10–30
—
4
random
SYN-COMM
400
15–40
—
3
community
Appendix
Table C.1: Dataset statistics. Avg. ∣V∣ and avg. ∣E∣ are means over graphs. SYN-RING is the random-label falsification control of SYN-RING-ROLE.
Component
VQ
Continuous
Raw
Tokenizer / autoencoder
3,623
2,599
—
Autoregressive prior
14,882
15,840
13,481
Stage-B decoder
20,744
20,744
20,744
Total
39,249
39,183
34,225
Appendix
Table C.2: Parameter budgets of the three component-attribution variants (MUTAG instance; all three share the same Stage-B decoder).
Ablation
Dataset
Setting
orbit MMD
conn.
Condition
PROTEINS
mean vs. pair
.248 vs. .174
.406 vs. .693
Condition
SYN-RING-ROLE
mean vs. pair
.030 vs. .009
.605 vs. .578
Condition
SYN-RING (control)
mean vs. pair, random labels
.017 vs. .027 (n.s.)
.479 vs. .521
Density reweight
MUTAG
w+=1/3/5
.523/.387/.536
.136/.672/.804
Corruption
PROTEINS
ρ=0/.15/.3
.211/.174/.175
.647/.693/.718
Appendix
Table C.3: GraphVQ conditioning ablations (means over three seeds; P0 protocol).
Ablation
Setting
Result
Ordering
8-order NLL: fixed/random/multi8 BFS (MUTAG)
1.441 / 1.486 / 1.096
Ordering
connectivity: fixed/multi8 (MUTAG)
0.650 / 0.984
Ordering
DFS/deg-desc/random vs. BFS (MUTAG)
conn. .56/.03/.02 vs. .80
Stage-B head
within-chunk AR vs. indep. Bernoulli (SYN-RING)
orbit .020 vs. .032
Stage-B readout
pooled vs. per-pair (MUTAG/SYN-RING)
orbit .642 vs. .777 / .032 vs. .034
Attr-only ctx
remove edge mask (MUTAG / SYN-RING)
orbit .590 / 1.166; conn ≈0
Appendix
Table C.4: GraphVQ order and Stage-B ablations (means over three seeds).
Metric
MUTAG
PROTEINS
SYN- RING-ROLE
SYN- COMM
Feature acc. ↑
0.857
0.987
0.934
0.990
Feature CE ↓
1.325
0.572
0.801
0.568
Edge AUROC ↑
0.994
0.950
0.993
0.892
Edge AUPRC ↑
0.970
0.843
0.989
0.761
Edge Brier ↓
0.016
0.065
0.029
0.075
Edge ECE ↓
0.003
0.005
0.004
0.007
Appendix
Table D.1: GraphVQ tokenizer fidelity on held-out splits (seed 0; reconstructed-graph structural MMDs against the true graphs).
Dataset
degree
clustering
orbit
spectral
MUTAG
.423 [.362,.516]
.897 [.884,.916]
.598 [.504,.730]
.074 [.065,.081]
PROTEINS
.163 [.150,.178]
1.031 [1.018,1.046]
.175 [.151,.198]
.044 [.043,.045]
SYN-RING-ROLE
.015 [.011,.020]
.013 [.004,.028]
.012 [.008,.017]
.086 [.081,.091]
SYN-COMM
.005 [.003,.007]
.015 [.012,.017]
.009 [.006,.012]
.057 [.055,.060]
Appendix
Table D.2: GraphVQ mean [bootstrap 95% CI] over five seeds.
Baseline
MUTAG
PROTEINS
SYN- RING-ROLE
SYN-COMM
One-stage
.202 (n.s.)
< .001
< .001
.002
Continuous
.030 †
.235 (n.s.)
.020
< .001
Raw
.908 (n.s.)
.502 (n.s.)
.155 (n.s.)
.245 (n.s.)
GraphRNN
.049 †
.010
< .001
< .001
GRAN
.928 (n.s.)
< .001
< .001
< .001
GraphVAE
.923 (n.s.)
< .001
< .001
< .001
Appendix
Table D.3: Paired t -test p -values vs. GraphVQ on orbit MMD (five seeds; n.s. marks p≥0.05 ; † marks baselines significantly better than GraphVQ ).
Metric
MUTAG
PROTEINS
SYN- RING-ROLE
SYN- COMM
Cond. NLL pos. (nats/bit)
1.943
2.335
0.281
1.436
Cond. NLL neg. (nats/bit)
0.125
0.046
0.097
0.127
Cond. Brier pos.
0.707
0.739
0.102
0.518
Cond. Brier neg.
0.015
0.005
0.014
0.029
Cond. ECE pos.
0.822
0.762
0.489
0.720
Cond. ECE neg.
0.116
0.185
0.107
0.109
Appendix
Table D.4: GraphVQ ’s unweighted conditional Stage-B metrics on held-out graphs under true conditions (mean over five seeds), and train- vs. test-reference orbit MMD of free generation (same fixed splits).
Dataset
Tokenizer
Active / K
Dead rate
Perplexity
Gini
MUTAG
context
12/32
.625
9.49
.76
feature-only
4/32
.875
2.30
.94
PROTEINS
context
23/32
.281
14.01
.66
feature-only
3/32
.906
2.20
.94
SYN-RING-ROLE
context
10/32
.688
6.05
.85
feature-only
4/32
.875
3.37
.91
Appendix
Table D.5: GraphVQ codebook diagnostics (seed 0). Context = full node context (features + edge mask); feature-only = attributes without the edge mask.
Graphs play a crucial role in many applications, ranging from drug discovery to social network modeling and astronomy. Generative models for graphs have substantially advanced in recent years, but we identify relatively simple scenarios where state-of-the-art models struggle to converge within a standard compute budget, or exhibit prohibitively slow generation times. We propose a generative architecture that achieves quality competitive with state-of-the-art models and is orders of magnitude faster at generation. Our approach is inspired by the Aldous-Hoover theorem, a classic representation theorem that characterizes any probability distribution of graphs that is invariant to permutations of node indices or exchangeable. This theorem establishes that three ingredients suffice: a graph-level latent variable, a set of exchangeable node-specific latent variables, and a so-called graphon function that maps graph- and node-level variables to the probability of an edge between any node pair. Given a training set of graphs, our exchangeable Variational Graph AutoEncoder (xVGAE) learns an approximation to their underlying graphons, as well as graph- and node-level latent variables. We show that our xVGAE encodes latent representations that correlate with graph- and node-level properties, and can (quickly, in one shot) generate new graphs that closely match key training set statistics.
Daniele Micheletti, Federica Zoe Ricci, Erik B. Sudderth
University of California, Irvine · Swarthmore College
In this paper, we introduce WL-SeqVAE, a sequence-based variational autoencoder for generating graphs. The key observation behind WL-SeqVAE is that node colors induced by the Weisfeiler-Leman (WL) algorithm provide compact discrete summaries of local graph structure and can therefore serve as structural tokens for generation. Rather than learning a distribution over adjacency matrices directly, our method maps each graph to a sequence of WL colors and employs a variational autoencoder that encodes this sequence into a Gaussian latent distribution, from which an autoregressive decoder reconstructs the graph. During generation, compatibility constraints derived from the WL colors guide node and edge predictions, combining global information from the latent representation with local structural consistency. This formulation turns graph generation into a sequence generation problem and avoids directly parameterizing a quadratic adjacency matrix. We evaluate WL-SeqVAE on molecular and general graph generation tasks. Across the evaluated datasets, WL-SeqVAE is competitive with established baselines on several local structural and molecular quality metrics. Code is available at https://github.com/iakovosevdaimon/WL-SeqVAE
Generating realistic and diverse graphs is a key problem in machine learning, with applications in molecular discovery, circuit design, cybersecurity, and beyond. However, current graph generative models remain limited by scalability and novelty. Diffusion-based methods often require costly full-adjacency operations and long denoising chains, while many autoregressive and hybrid models have at least quadratic complexity. In addition, these models often imitate training graphs rather than generalize beyond them. We propose a lightweight autoregressive framework to address these issues. It uses a structure-guided topological ordering to serialize graphs into regular edge sequences, enabling near log-linear generation, and a two-phase training strategy that combines exploration-oriented augmentation with iterative refinement to reduce overfitting and promote controlled novelty. Experiments on molecular and non-molecular benchmarks show that our approach improves novelty while preserving high validity and uniqueness. The framework also supports both LSTM and Mamba-style causal sequence backbones, with large-memory accelerators enabling longer graph-sequence experiments beyond typical GPU limits.