A Spectral Framework for Evaluating Geodesic Distances Between Graphs
Soumen Sikder Shuvo, Ali Aghdaei, Zhuo Feng

TL;DR
This paper introduces a spectral framework and a novel Graph Geodesic Distance metric for quantifying dissimilarities between graphs, improving graph classification and analysis of graph neural networks.
Contribution
It proposes a new spectral-based metric, GGD, with a graph coarsening scheme, enhancing graph comparison tasks especially with partial node features.
Findings
GGD outperforms state-of-the-art metrics like TMD in graph classification.
The spectral framework effectively captures key structural differences between graphs.
GGD is versatile for applications beyond classification, including GNN stability and dataset comparison.
Abstract
This paper presents a spectral framework for quantifying the differentiation between graph data samples by introducing a novel metric named Graph Geodesic Distance (GGD). For two different graphs with the same number of nodes, our framework leverages a spectral graph matching procedure to find node correspondence so that the geodesic distance between them can be subsequently computed by solving a generalized eigenvalue problem associated with their Laplacian matrices. For graphs of different sizes, a resistance-based spectral graph coarsening scheme is introduced to reduce the size of the larger graph while preserving the original spectral properties. We show that the proposed GGD metric can effectively quantify dissimilarities between two graphs by encapsulating their differences in key structural (spectral) properties, such as effective resistances between nodes, cuts, and the mixing…
Peer Reviews
Decision·ICLR 2026 Conference Withdrawn Submission
S1. Addresses the problem of graph distance measurement in a novel manner. S2. Creatively exploits previous work in the area. S3. Conducts experiments vs. a single previous metric.
W1. It is unclear why the new spectral distance function is necessary, and how it compares to established distance function such as the Frobenius norm between adjacency matrices and related graph alignment methods. W2. It is unclear how the proposed spectral comparison methodology differs from already existing spectral graph alignment methods such as GRASP [TKDD 17(4)]. W3. It is unclear how the proposes spectral quantification of graph difference related to existing spectral signatures, such
Measuring distances on graphs is an important problem that has been studied for centuries. I suggest the authors review "netrd: A library for network reconstruction and graph distances" (https://joss.theoj.org/papers/10.21105/joss.02990) and the paper "Network comparison and the within-ensemble graph distance" (https://royalsocietypublishing.org/doi/10.1098/rspa.2019.0744).
-The Graph Geodesic Distance (GGD) is not a metric because it does not satisfy both directions of the identity of indiscernibles axiom: the distance between two points is zero if and only if they are the same point. This failure arises from the co-spectrality problem, where two graphs can have the same spectra but be different. Thus, GGD is a pseudo-metric. -GGD is not scalable to large graphs with millions of nodes because it requires spectral matching and eigenvalue computation. - Neither ph
* Strong mathematical grounding: GGD is rigorously defined on the SPD manifold with formal proofs that it satisfies the metric axioms (identity, symmetry, positivity, triangle inequality). The connection between generalized eigenvalues and “cut mismatches” provides a meaningful spectral interpretation. * Empirical performance: Demonstrates steady improvements (5–10 pp accuracy gains) over TMD and GNN baselines on benchmark datasets, and robustness under partial or missing node features.
* Expensive and small-scale: The method still requires multiple cubic-time steps (eigendecomposition, assignment, generalized eigenvalues). Approximate variants are described but not fully benchmarked on large graphs. * Limited exploration of SPD metrics: Only AIRM is fully tested; Log-Euclidean (LERM) appears briefly in the appendix and performs similarly. Other SPD metrics or linear approximations could be compared.
The main strength of this approach is its complexity O(N^3) versus TMD. On top of that the switch to spectrum comparison provides also superior results on graph classification as it handles structural dissimilarities (spectrum) better.
The main weakness is the need of point to point matching. This dependance puts limit on the size of the data that is feasible for comparison and puts a shade on the advantages of the spectrum comparison because it relies on point-to-point in pre-calc.
Videos
No videos yet. Explain this paper in a talk, walkthrough, or lecture? Add one.
Taxonomy
TopicsNeural Networks and Applications
