Measuring and Relieving the Over-smoothing Problem for Graph Neural Networks from the Topological View
Abstract
Graph Neural Networks (GNNs) have achieved promising performance on a wide range of graph-based tasks. Despite their success, one severe limitation of GNNs is the over-smoothing issue (indistinguishable representations of nodes in different classes). In this work, we present a systematic and quantitative study on the over-smoothing issue of GNNs. First, we introduce two quantitative metrics, MAD and MADGap, to measure the smoothness and over-smoothness of the graph nodes representations, respectively. Then, we verify that smoothing is the nature of GNNs and the critical factor leading to over-smoothness is the low information-to-noise ratio of the message received by the nodes, which is partially determined by the graph topology. Finally, we propose two methods to alleviate the over-smoothing issue from the topological view: (1) MADReg which adds a MADGap-based regularizer to the training objective; (2) AdaEdge which optimizes the graph topology based on the model predictions. Extensive experiments on $7$ widely-used graph datasets with $10$ typical GNN models show that the two proposed methods are effective for relieving the over-smoothing issue, thus improving the performance of various GNN models.
Benchmark Results
Tested on 3 datasets
Tables show presented results in global context (best 3 papers + GCN + MLP).
Classic
| # | Model | Accuracy ↑ | Paper |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | GraphTARIF | 0.9703
±0.0019 | |
| 2 | GAT | 0.9669
±0.0014 best reported | |
| 3 | GAT+T | 0.9660
±0.0007 | |
| 7 | SAGE | 0.9643
±0.0027 | |
| 8 | GCN | 0.9632
±0.0008 best reported | |
| 56 | GraphSAGE | 0.9508
±0.0026 best reported | best today: A Quasi-Wasserstein Loss for Learning Graph Neural Networks (WWW 2023) |
| 374 | acc | 0.9150
±0.0050 | This paper |
| 390 | MLP | 0.9128
±0.0063 | |
| 429 | FeaSt | 0.9050
±0.0060 | This paper |
| 449 | ARMA | 0.9000
±0.0495 best reported | best today: Graph Structure Prompt Learning: A Novel Methodology to Improve Performance of Graph Neural Networks (2024) Difference within reported uncertainty; not counted as underperformance. |
| 462 | ChebGCN | 0.8960
±0.0160 | This paper |
| 473 | DNA | 0.8910
±0.0130 | This paper |
| 495 | HyperGraph | 0.8750
±0.0070 | This paper |
| 552 | GGNN | 0.7410
±0.1230 | This paper |
| 573 | HighOrder | 0.2610
±0.1240 | This paper |
| # | Model | Accuracy ↑ | Paper |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | GraphTARIF | 0.9461
±0.0017 | |
| 2 | GCN | 0.9412
±0.0008 best reported | |
| 3 | GAT | 0.9398
±0.0022 best reported | |
| 8 | SAGE | 0.9351
±0.0006 | |
| 46 | GraphSAGE | 0.9120
±0.0029 best reported | best today: Can TabPFN Compete with GNNs for Node Classification via Graph Tabularization? (LoG 2025) |
| 320 | MLP | 0.8463 | |
| 356 | ARMA | 0.8383
±0.0058 best reported | best today: Graph Structure Prompt Learning: A Novel Methodology to Improve Performance of Graph Neural Networks (2024) Difference within reported uncertainty; not counted as underperformance. |
| 395 | acc | 0.8240
±0.0110 | This paper |
| 421 | ChebGCN | 0.8080
±0.0240 | This paper |
| 422 | FeaSt | 0.8080
±0.0130 | This paper |
| 441 | DNA | 0.7820
±0.0290 | This paper |
| 484 | HyperGraph | 0.5870
±0.2210 | This paper |
| 494 | GGNN | 0.4240
±0.2670 | This paper |
| 502 | HighOrder | 0.2630
±0.1270 | This paper |
| # | Model | Accuracy ↑ | Paper |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | GrokFormer | 0.9831
±0.0018 | |
| 2 | PolyFormer | 0.9808
±0.0027 | |
| 3 | SGFormer | 0.9796
±0.0081 | |
| 9 | GCN | 0.9774
±0.0035 | |
| 43 | GraphSAGE | 0.9649
±0.0006 best reported | best today: Polynormer: Polynomial-Expressive Graph Transformer in Linear Time (ICLR 2024) |
| 58 | MLP | 0.9597
±0.0007 | |
| 222 | DNA (+AE) | 0.9330
±0.0040 | This paper |
| 242 | GCN (+AE) | 0.9300
±0.0110 | This paper |
| 249 | ARMA (+AE) | 0.9260
±0.0100 | This paper |
| 259 | HyperGraph (+AE) | 0.9220
±0.0140 | This paper |
| 265 | GGNN (+AE) | 0.9160
±0.0070 | This paper |
| 266 | GAT (+AE) | 0.9140
±0.0100 | This paper |
| 270 | HighOrder (+AE) | 0.9090
±0.0060 | This paper |
| 275 | FeaSt | 0.8840
±0.0020 | This paper |
