TCHG: Tri-Trust Conditioned Heterogeneous Graph Learning for Reliable Dynamic Trust Prediction
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Trust prediction infers latent user-user trust relations and provides important support for social recommendation, fake-review and manipulation detection, and risk identification. Graph neural networks have become a prominent approach to trust prediction because of their ability to learn network structures and complex trust dependencies. However, existing methods often rely on a unified representation of trust signals and do not disentangle heterogeneous trust evidence into separate evidence channels, failing to exploit the distinct roles that different evidence channels should play during trust modeling. To address this gap, this paper argues that trust evidence should not be treated as an undifferentiated input, but should be decomposed and used as functional control factors over graph propagation. We propose TCHG, a tri-trust conditioned heterogeneous graph learning framework that decomposes trust evidence into three channels and assigns them distinct functional roles in propagation: entity reliability governs message admission, interaction-behavior reliability modulates propagation strength, and contextual trust adjusts the propagation mode through context-conditioned operator selection. Since the three evidence channels evolve at different temporal scales, TCHG maintains independent temporal states with non-uniform decay rates to prevent rapidly changing contextual signals from overwriting slowly accumulated entity reliability. It further predicts trust probability and calibrates the output probability, improving predictive confidence under sparse or conflicting evidence. Extensive experiments on multiple public trust datasets show that TCHG achieves effective and reliable trust prediction compared with representative trust prediction and heterogeneous graph baselines.
Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 19 of its 47 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 15 Jun 2026.
Builds on
19 of 47 references.
References · 19
- 2016Semi-Supervised Classification with Graph Convolutional Networkscited by 11,361
- 2017Graph Attention Networkscited by 8,923
- 2017Inductive Representation Learning on Large Graphscited by 6,320
- 2017On Calibration of Modern Neural Networkscited by 4,960
- 2016Simple and Scalable Predictive Uncertainty Estimation using Deep Ensemblescited by 3,926
- 2017What Uncertainties Do We Need in Bayesian Deep Learning for Computer Vision?cited by 2,352
- 2017Modeling Relational Data with Graph Convolutional Networkscited by 1,694
- 2019Heterogeneous Graph Attention Networkcited by 734
- 2020Heterogeneous Graph Transformercited by 582
- 2020Temporal Graph Networks for Deep Learning on Dynamic Graphscited by 530
- 2020Inductive Representation Learning on Temporal Graphscited by 462
- 2019Predicting Dynamic Embedding Trajectory in Temporal Interaction Networkscited by 448
7 more
- 2019Beyond temperature scaling: Obtaining well-calibrated multiclass probabilities with Dirichlet calibrationcited by 364
- 2019An Attention-based Graph Neural Network for Heterogeneous Structural Learningcited by 71
- 2023TrustGuard: GNN-based Robust and Explainable Trust Evaluation with Dynamicity Supportcited by 12
- 2022TrustGNN: Graph Neural Network based Trust Evaluation via Learnable Propagative and Composable Naturecited by 10
- 2023KGTrust: Evaluating Trustworthiness of SIoT via Knowledge Enhanced Graph Neural Networkscited by 9
- 2025Large Language Models as 'Hidden Persuaders': Fake Product Reviews are Indistinguishable to Humans and Machinescited by 4
- 2025CAT: Can Trust be Predicted with Context-Awareness in Dynamic Heterogeneous Networks?cited by 2
Built on by
Not cited yet.