Beyond the Laplacian: Interpolated Spectral Augmentation for Graph Neural Networks
Ziyao Cui, Edric Tam

TL;DR
This paper introduces Interpolated Laplacian Embeddings (ILEs), a new spectral augmentation method for graph neural networks that enhances node features by leveraging alternative graph matrices, improving performance in feature-limited scenarios.
Contribution
The paper presents ILEs, a novel spectral augmentation technique derived from a family of graph matrices, expanding the spectral tools available for GNN feature augmentation.
Findings
ILEs improve GNN performance on real-world datasets.
Spectral embeddings from alternative matrices are effective for feature augmentation.
ILEs provide a practical and interpretable spectral augmentation method.
Abstract
Graph neural networks (GNNs) are fundamental tools in graph machine learning. The performance of GNNs relies crucially on the availability of informative node features, which can be limited or absent in real-life datasets and applications. A natural remedy is to augment the node features with embeddings computed from eigenvectors of the graph Laplacian matrix. While it is natural to default to Laplacian spectral embeddings, which capture meaningful graph connectivity information, we ask whether spectral embeddings from alternative graph matrices can also provide useful representations for learning. We introduce Interpolated Laplacian Embeddings (ILEs), which are derived from a simple yet expressive family of graph matrices. Using tools from spectral graph theory, we offer a straightforward interpretation of the structural information that ILEs capture. We demonstrate through simulations…
Peer Reviews
Decision·Submitted to ICLR 2026
The paper is generally well written. Although there are several works on spectral positional encodings for GNNs, the specific experiments on how these embeddings behave when using interpolating matrices appear to be new.
I believe the paper falls short. The idea is interesting, but the fact that eigenvectors from different matrices have different effects on downstream tasks is already known (as the authors themselves acknowledge), and the experiments presented here merely confirm this. There is no real new insight into when one should prefer one matrix over another — or, equivalently, one set of (t,s) parameters over another. In this sense, I think that the contribution is incremental.
S1. The paper tackles a practical and significant problem. The reliance of GNNs on high-quality node features is a well-known limitation. S2. The theoretical analysis in Section 3.2 provides an intuitive interpretation of the $M(t,s)$ family. By analyzing the quadratic form $x^{\top}M(t,s)x$, the authors clearly explain how the parameters $t$ and $s$ balance the Laplacian quadratic form (favoring community structure) and the adjacency quadratic form (favoring core-periphery structure). S3. Th
W1. The central idea of using a generalized graph matrix is not new. The proposed $M(t,s) = tD - sA$ family is a simplified version of the "universal adjacency matrices" family and is closely related to other existing families, such as the "deformed Laplacian", which the paper itself discusses. The proof in Lemma 3.1, showing that ILEs subsume the deformed Laplacian (up to an identity shift), is straightforward. W2. A significant weakness is the absence of a method to select the $s$ and $t$ pa
1. The motivation of the proposed method is clearly explained and valid. 2. This paper generalizes the idea of utilizing spectral embeddings in node feature augmentation. Moreover, theoretical analyses and explanations are provided. 3. Various types of experimental settings are adopted for better validation.
1. Using spectral embedding as node features has been researched early, both in GNNs and Graph Transformers, such as Specformer[1]. Please compare with those methods for a more convincing and comprehensive understanding. [1] Specformer: Spectral Graph Neural Networks Meet Transformers, ICLR 2023 2. This paper provides a clear theoretical understanding of the proposed method. However, theoretical power or performance is not discussed. Lemma 3.1 is straightforward. 3. Calculating eigenvectors i
Videos
No videos yet. Explain this paper in a talk, walkthrough, or lecture? Add one.
Taxonomy
TopicsAdvanced Graph Neural Networks · Graph Theory and Algorithms · Functional Brain Connectivity Studies
