CITED: A Decision Boundary-Aware Signature for GNNs Towards Model Extraction Defense
Abstract
Domain fit: Niche / domain-specific · No strong AI-core implementation/artifact signals were detected from current providers.
Graph neural networks (GNNs) have demonstrated superior performance in various applications, such as recommendation systems and financial risk management. However, deploying large-scale GNN models locally is particularly challenging for users, as it requires significant computational resources and extensive property data. Consequently, Machine Learning as a Service (MLaaS) has become increasingly popular, offering a convenient way to deploy and access various models, including GNNs. However, an emerging threat known as Model Extraction Attacks (MEAs) presents significant risks, as adversaries can readily obtain surrogate GNN models exhibiting similar functionality. Specifically, attackers repeatedly query the target model using subgraph inputs to collect corresponding responses. These input-output pairs are subsequently utilized to train their own surrogate models at minimal cost. Many techniques have been proposed to defend against MEAs, but most are limited to specific output levels (e.g., embedding or label) and suffer from inherent technical drawbacks. To address these limitations, we propose a novel ownership verification framework CITED which is a first-of-its-kind method to achieve ownership verification on both embedding and label levels. Moreover, CITED is a novel signature-based method that neither harms downstream performance nor introduces auxiliary models that reduce efficiency, while still outperforming all watermarking and fingerprinting approaches. Extensive experiments demonstrate the effectiveness and robustness of our CITED framework. Code is available at: https://github.com/LabRAI/CITED.
Results and benchmarks
Graph neural networks (GNNs) have demonstrated superior performance in various applications, such as recommendation systems and financial risk management.
Benchmark evidence is limited
Evidence graph: 2 refs, 1 links.
Utility signals: depth 60/100, grounding 58/100, status medium.
Implementation
No direct implementation yet
Maintained implementation evidence is not confirmed for this paper yet.
Use the implementation status and reproduction sections for the current action plan.
No verified maintained repo yet
There is no verified maintained implementation yet. Use this baseline plan to decide whether to prototype now or defer.
- No direct maintained implementation was found. Use the paper PDF and citation graph to design a baseline reproduction.
- Track assumptions and missing details in an experiment log before coding.
Time to first repro: a few days
Recommendation evidence is currently too limited for a maintained-repo choice. Use Implementation Status and Reproduction Path for a practical baseline plan.
- Estimate is based on paper-only reproduction flow
Reproduction readiness
No repo
No verified implementation available
- No maintained repository has been identified for this paper. Check adjacent implementations or HF artifacts below.
Hardware requirements
- Expect multi-day setup/compute for meaningful reproduction based on current guidance.
Validation caveat
Repositories and ecosystem
No additional verified repositories beyond the primary recommendation.
These repositories had low-confidence matching signals and are hidden by default.
- LabRAI/CITED
Confidence: Medium · 0 stars
Hugging Face artifacts
No trustworthy direct or curated related Hugging Face artifacts were found yet. Use targeted searches to quickly locate candidate models, datasets, and demos.
Models
Datasets
Spaces
Tip: start with models, then check datasets and spaces if you need evaluation data or demos.
Research context
Open this paper in HFEPX to review benchmark signals, evaluation modes, and human-feedback protocol context.
Open in HFEPX