Learning Adaptive Distribution Alignment with Neural Characteristic Function for Graph Domain Adaptation
Wei Chen, Xingyu Guo, Shuang Li, Zhao Zhang, Yan Zhong, Fuzhen Zhuang, Deqing wang

TL;DR
This paper introduces ADAlign, a flexible and adaptive framework for graph domain adaptation that automatically identifies and aligns the most relevant distribution discrepancies using neural characteristic functions, improving transfer performance.
Contribution
The paper proposes ADAlign, a novel adaptive distribution alignment method that automatically detects and aligns key discrepancies in graph domain adaptation without manual heuristics.
Findings
Outperforms state-of-the-art methods on 10 datasets and 16 transfer tasks.
Achieves lower memory usage and faster training.
Effectively captures complex attribute-structure dependencies.
Abstract
Graph Domain Adaptation (GDA) transfers knowledge from labeled source graphs to unlabeled target graphs but is challenged by complex, multi-faceted distributional shifts. Existing methods attempt to reduce distributional shifts by aligning manually selected graph elements (e.g., node attributes or structural statistics), which typically require manually designed graph filters to extract relevant features before alignment. However, such approaches are inflexible: they rely on scenario-specific heuristics, and struggle when dominant discrepancies vary across transfer scenarios. To address these limitations, we propose \textbf{ADAlign}, an Adaptive Distribution Alignment framework for GDA. Unlike heuristic methods, ADAlign requires no manual specification of alignment criteria. It automatically identifies the most relevant discrepancies in each transfer and aligns them jointly, capturing…
Peer Reviews
Decision·ICLR 2026 Poster
1. Novel methodology: This paper introduces NSD, a novel parametric distance for graphs that leverages neural characteristic function in the spectral domain to capture multi-level feature-structure dependencies, providing a unified approach to quantifying distributional shifts. 2. Effective adaptive mechanism: This paper proposes an adaptive framework that automatically identifies and aligns the most relevant sources of discrepancy in each transfer scenario, enabling flexible and task-aware adap
1. The paper's core philosophy is adaptivity, yet the amplitude weight k, which balances amplitude and phase, is a hand-tuned hyperparameter. The analysis in Figure 6 shows an optimal range, but it's possible that it is also scenario-dependent. A fixed k seems slightly at odds with the "adaptive" goal. 2. It would be helpful if the paper could further justify modeling the sampler as a normal scale mixture, and clarify whether simpler parameterizations such as a single Gaussian, a fixed finite mi
1. Eliminates manual specification of alignment criteria by dynamically prioritizing relevant spectral components for each transfer scenario. 2. NSD integrates amplitude and phase differences for a comprehensive view of cross-graph shifts. 3. Performs consistently well across domains.
1. Regarding the acceleration aspect, I understand the paper adopts the spectral method. However, this approach does not have low computational complexity. What methods are used for acceleration or approximation in the paper? It would be better if the authors could provide a proof of the complexity. 2. The perspective proposed in the paper is good, but I am not very familiar with the statement in the introduction: "these approaches often rely on heuristic strategies that first manually design gr
1. Figure 1 clearly illustrates the limitations of existing approaches, providing strong motivation for introducing adaptive alignment. 2. The introduction of NSD based on neural characteristic functions is theoretically grounded. By performing adaptive alignment in the spectral domain, the method provides a more flexible framework. 3. The experiments are comprehensive, covering 13 strong baselines across 16 transfer scenarios, with ablation studies and parameter sensitivity analyses supporting
1. Although the paper explains that low-frequency captures large-scale structures and high-frequency captures fine-grained structures, it does not clearly clarify what specific graph structural characteristics the learned frequency distributions reflect. 2. There is no analysis or experiment showing how replacing the GNN backbone affects the NSD-based alignment performance. 3. While the paper provides a complexity analysis, the paper lacks experiments on the scalability of ADAlign to very large
Videos
No videos yet. Explain this paper in a talk, walkthrough, or lecture? Add one.
Taxonomy
TopicsAdvanced Graph Neural Networks · Domain Adaptation and Few-Shot Learning · Machine Learning in Healthcare
