TL;DR
This paper introduces GEDAN, an end-to-end graph neural network framework that learns context-aware edit costs for graph edit distance, improving interpretability and applicability in complex graph analysis.
Contribution
It presents a novel neural network approach that learns fine-grained, task-specific edit costs for GED, addressing limitations of previous methods assuming uniform costs.
Findings
Outperforms existing approximation methods in accuracy
Produces interpretable graph matchings
Effective in molecular analysis applications
Abstract
Graph Edit Distance (GED) is defined as the minimum cost transformation of one graph into another and is a widely adopted metric for measuring the dissimilarity between graphs. The major problem of GED is that its computation is NP-hard, which has in turn led to the development of various approximation methods, including approaches based on neural networks (NN). However, most NN methods assume a unit cost for edit operations -- a restrictive and often unrealistic simplification, since topological and functional distances rarely coincide in real-world data. In this paper, we propose a fully end-to-end Graph Neural Network framework for learning the edit costs for GED, at a fine-grained level, aligning topological and task-specific similarity. Our method combines an unsupervised self-organizing mechanism for GED approximation with a Generalized Additive Model that flexibly learns…
Peer Reviews
Decision·Submitted to ICLR 2026
- The paper clearly identifies an important gap: neural GED models typically assume fixed scalar edit costs, while many real applications require context-specific edit penalties. Highlighting this limitation and attempting to address it is meaningful and timely. Learnable edit costs tailored to the downstream graph relevance task is still an open an interesting challenge. - Usage of a pre-trained Gumbel–Sinkhorn network to approximate permutations is an interesting choice. If this pretraining
- The paper frames its goal as learning the classical edit operation costs for GED — specifically the node/edge insertion and deletion costs $a^{\oplus}, a^{\ominus}, b^{\oplus}, b^{\ominus}$. However, these costs appear to remain fixed in the proposed architecture. Instead, the model learns a node-to-node pairwise substitution cost $c_{i,j}$. Instead of learning edit costs, in the traditional GED sense this is rather learning affinity measure (aka edit costs) for soft matching. Thus the cent
(1) The paper addresses a well-known and significant limitation of standard GED: the mismatch between topological distance (using fixed/unit costs) and functional similarity, particularly in domains like computational chemistry. (2) The core idea of building an end-to-end, differentiable framework to learn these costs is novel and valuable, as it allows GED to be optimized directly for downstream tasks. (3) The model offers a path to interpretability by analyzing the learned edit costs.
(1) Hard limit of 128 nodes due to Gumbel-Sinkhorn complexity is critically restrictive. (2) Table 3 shows RMSE of 2509.84 (No-PT) vs 3.54 (PT) - the method completely fails without careful initialization. This is reasonable, but is a Gumbel–Sinkhorn trained on random matrices optimal for real GNN-induced cost matrices? (3) Domain generality not fully shown. All downstream is molecular / chem. That is fine, but GED gets used in scene graphs, program graphs, point-cloud graphs, document structure
This paper addresses a difficult topic, which is the estimation of the edit costs in GED for a given task. The proposed method relies on recent advances in the literature, such as Jain et al. (2024), and provides recent advances by exploring the Gumbel-Sinkhorn that allows approximation of permutation matrices. The appendices provide essential information to better understand the proposed method, with extensive experimental analysis.
The title of the paper is too general. There are many other methods that learn the edit costs for graph edit distance. The authors are missing some of the related literature on this topic. The proposed method relies on a pre-trained Gumbel-Sinkhorn network to approximate the Linear Sum Assignment Problem (LSAP). While this is an interesting approach, it is also a major weakness because one needs to pre-train the network. This leads to several issues, as described in the following. The resultin
Videos
No videos yet. Explain this paper in a talk, walkthrough, or lecture? Add one.
