Searcharxiv⌕ Search

arXiv · 2611.09240

MM-DyGraph: A Dataset, Benchmark, and Model for Multimodal Dynamic Graphs

Abstract

Multimodal dynamic graphs are pervasive in real-world applications, where nodes and edges are accompanied by multimodal signals, including text and images. Despite their practical importance, benchmarks and methods that explicitly study multimodal learning in dynamic graphs remain scarce, hindering the full understanding and effective utilization of multimodal information for downstream tasks. To address this gap, we introduce MM-DyGraph, to the best of our knowledge, the first benchmark for multimodal dynamic graph learning, consisting of diverse real-world datasets with fine-grained temporal graph evolution and rich multimodal attributes. MM-DyGraph provides three evaluation tasks to comprehensively assess model performance in dynamic settings. We benchmark representative state-of-the-art dynamic graph methods and reveal that naive feature concatenation yields target-level inconsistencies: multimodal inputs benefit certain prediction targets while harming others. This observation indicates that the modality informativeness depends on the specific prediction target over time. Building on these observations, we propose a Target-aware Spatial-Temporal Multimodal Fusion (TST-MF) framework, which jointly conditions multimodal fusion on the prediction target and spatial-temporal relations, enabling context-adaptive cross-modal interplay for target-specific representations. Extensive experiments over diverse datasets and tasks show that TST-MF delivers robust and competitive performance, achieving clear gains in multimodal settings.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Zongyuan Wu, Pengjie Wang, Lingshan Chen, Tianhang Wan, Yuan Meng, Xin Wang, Ling Feng, Wenwu Zhu. 2026-11-06. MM-DyGraph: A Dataset, Benchmark, and Model for Multimodal Dynamic Graphs. https://arxiv.org/abs/2611.09240

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

Limit Analysis for Symbolic Multi-step Reasoning Tasks with Information Propagation Rules Based on Transformers

Transformers are able to perform reasoning tasks, however the intrinsic mechanism remains widely open. In this paper we propose a set of information propagation rules based on Transformers and utilize symbolic reasoning tasks to theoretically analyze the limit reasoning steps. We show that the limit number of reasoning steps is between $2^{L-1}-1$ and $\frac{3^{L-1}-1}{2}$ for a model with $L$ attention layers in a single-pass. In addition, we find that, for problems with a fixed number of reasoning steps, Transformers exhibit a preference for generating sequences that satisfy certain ordering relations. Ultimately, we construct a Transformer and prove that the limiting reasoning depth is achievable.

cs.AI↗

Counterfactual Distillation: Internalizing Reflective Experience into LLM Agent

Large language models increasingly act as autonomous agents in long-horizon interactions, learning from final outcomes and environmental feedback. However, optimizing from such interaction experience remains challenging, as feedback is heterogeneous and rarely carries explicit reward information. Existing post-training approaches rely on outcome-driven methods, such as reinforcement learning with verifiable rewards (RLVR), which primarily exploit final success signals while leaving interaction experience and feedback underutilized. In sparse-reward, long-horizon tasks, this often results in distribution sharpening: the policy reinforces a narrow set of already-successful behaviors, without substantially improving the feedback-grounded agency needed for broader problem-solving capacity (e.g., Pass@k). We propose Counterfactual Distillation, a framework that converts exploration-derived experience into trainable policy supervision. Specifically, we organize exploration as a tree-structured search process, where the agent reflects on past decision points and makes new experience-guided decisions to form alternative branches. These corrections are then distilled as counterfactual targets: we train the model to predict the revised action from the original history without explicitly providing the experience, thereby introducing out-of-distribution behavior patterns and expanding exploration capacity. Across diverse interactive coding and agentic tasks, our method outperforms outcome-driven baselines such as GRPO and experience-based methods such as Early Experience, with gains of up to 14 percentage points over the base model on Pass@128. When interleaved with reinforcement learning updates, it further raises the performance ceiling, improving Pass@1 on Sokoban by 8 percentage points over extended GRPO. Our code is available at https://github.com/motigrez/Counterfactual-Distillation.

cs.AI↗

Taming the Centaur(s) with LAPITHS: a framework for a theoretically grounded interpretation of AI performances

We introduce a framework called LAPITHS (Language model Analysis through Paradigm grounded Interpretations of Theses about Human likenesS) and use it to show that several major claims advanced by models such as CENTAUR, proposed as an artificial Unified Model of Cognition, are not theoretically or empirically justified. LAPITHS provides a principled reference point for counteracting the current behaviouristic tendency in AI research to interpret the human level performances of transformer based language models as evidence of human like underlying computation and, by extension, as signs of cognitive abilities. The novelty of LAPITHS lies in making explicit the arguments grounded in two quantitative assessments: (i) the Minimal Cognitive Grid, a theoretically motivated method for estimating the cognitive plausibility of artificial systems, and (ii) a behavioural comparison showing that results similar to those reported for CENTAUR like models can be reproduced by other systems that do not satisfy the structural constraints typically associated with cognitive plausibility, and whose outputs do not provide independent explanatory insight into human cognition.

cs.AI↗