PaperScope
LIVE · 2026-10-06 05:40 UTC

Your Temporal Link Predictor Is Blind to Who Is Active: A Missing Factor That Transfers Across Models

Ji Zhang, Zixin Liu, Yiran Ding, Jiayi Wang, Yilu Du, Weijia Xuan

Latestcs.CLcs.LGcs.AIcs.CV
arXiv ID
2610.04869 v1
Category
Submitted
2026-10-04

Abstract

An interaction has two parts: someone decides to act, and then chooses whom to act on. Temporal link prediction has concentrated on the second, and we show that it is blind to the first by construction: a standard negative keeps the real source and swaps the destination, and we prove that this cancels the source's activity exactly from the optimal score, so no model trained and evaluated this way is ever rewarded for learning it. Under the harder historical and inductive negatives, whose sources differ, the same factor becomes the dominant signal. We model it with Source Node Activity Modeling (SNAM), a self-exciting event intensity fitted by an exact point-process likelihood to decayed interaction counts the history states already contain; it has fewer than 20 parameters. On their own, never looking at the destination, these parameters beat DyGFormer and TPNet on four of five datasets under historical negatives. Added to the frozen scores of TPNet, TGN, DyGFormer and DSRD, four models of different design, without retraining anything, they raise AP on almost every backbone-dataset pair in both settings, by up to 25 points. Our full model ranks first overall against eleven baselines on 13 datasets and three protocols, and on million-event streams trains an epoch 9-100x faster than TPNet and DyGFormer. We conclude that source activity is a blind spot of temporal link prediction, and a cheap, transferable one to close. Code is available at https://github.com/Erutaner/Your-Temporal-Link-Predictor-Is-Blind-to-Who-Is-Active.

Comment: 62 pages, 6 figures, 19 tables

arXiv abs page · PDF · same-day batch