# Graph Neural Networks for Misinformation Detection: Performance-Efficiency Trade-offs

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2604.08131 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2604.08131/

## Key facts

- No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Builds on 8 of its 32 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 9 Apr 2026.

## Builds on (most cited first, 8 of 8)

- [Semi-Supervised Classification with Graph Convolutional Networks](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1609.02907/) (2016)
- [Graph Attention Networks](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1710.10903/) (2017)
- [Inductive Representation Learning on Large Graphs](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1706.02216/) (2017)
- [Convolutional Neural Networks on Graphs with Fast Localized Spectral Filtering](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1606.09375/) (2016)
- [Simplifying Graph Convolutional Networks](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1902.07153/) (2019)
- ["Liar, Liar Pants on Fire": A New Benchmark Dataset for Fake News Detection](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1705.00648/) (2017)
- [FakeNewsNet: A Data Repository with News Content, Social Context and Spatialtemporal Information for Studying Fake News on Social Media](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1809.01286/) (2018)
- [Domain-based user embedding for competing events on social media](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2308.14806/) (2023)

## Abstract (arXiv)

The rapid spread of online misinformation has led to increasingly complex detection models, including large language models and hybrid architectures. However, their computational cost and deployment limitations raise concerns about practical applicability. In this work, we benchmark graph neural networks (GNNs) against non-graph-based machine learning methods under controlled and comparable conditions. We evaluate lightweight GNN architectures (GCN, GraphSAGE, GAT, ChebNet) against Logistic Regression, Support Vector Machines, and Multilayer Perceptrons across seven public datasets in English, Indonesian, and Polish. All models use identical TF-IDF features to isolate the impact of relational structure. Performance is measured using F1 score, with inference time reported to assess efficiency. GNNs consistently outperform non-graph baselines across all datasets. For example, GraphSAGE achieves 96.8% F1 on Kaggle and 91.9% on WELFake, compared to 73.2% and 66.8% for MLP, respectively. On COVID-19, GraphSAGE reaches 90.5% F1 vs. 74.9%, while ChebNet attains 79.1% vs. 66.4% on FakeNewsNet. These gains are achieved with comparable or lower inference times. Overall, the results show that classic GNNs remain effective and efficient, challenging the need for increasingly complex architectures in misinformation detection.