NeurIPS 2020

Scalable Graph Neural Networks via Bidirectional Propagation

Ming Chen, Zhewei Wei, Bolin Ding, Yaliang Li, Ye Yuan, Xiaoyong Du, Ji-rong Wen

Main figure for Scalable Graph Neural Networks via Bidirectional Propagation

Abstract

Graph Neural Networks (GNN) is an emerging field for learning on non-Euclidean data. Recently, there has been increased interest in designing GNN that scales to large graphs. Most existing methods use "graph sampling" or "layer-wise sampling" techniques to reduce training time. However, these methods still suffer from degrading performance and scalability problems when applying to graphs with billions of edges. This paper presents GBP, a scalable GNN that utilizes a localized bidirectional propagation process from both the feature vectors and the training/testing nodes. Theoretical analysis shows that GBP is the first method that achieves sub-linear time complexity for both the precomputation and the training phases. An extensive empirical study demonstrates that GBP achieves state-of-the-art performance with significantly less training/testing time. Most notably, GBP can deliver superior performance on a graph with over 60 million nodes and 1.8 billion edges in less than half an hour on a single machine.

Proposed method: GBP

Benchmark Results

Tested on 3 datasets 9 baseline values reported too low

Tables show presented results in global context (best 3 papers + GCN + MLP).

Classic

#ModelAccuracy ↑Paper
1
GraphSAGE+CNA
0.9418 ±0.0033
2
GCN+CNA
0.9366 ±0.0048
3
TransformerConv
0.9350 ±0.0058
21
GCN
actual #21 vs paper #573 552 places worse
0.9004
best reported
actual #21 vs paper #573 552 places worse
paper 0.8150 ±0.0060
paper 0.8150 ±0.0060 Δ at pub 0.0567 Δ today 0.0854
39
SAGE
0.8911 ±0.0012
44
GAT
actual #44 vs paper #389 345 places worse
0.8897 ±0.0014
best reported
actual #44 vs paper #389 345 places worse
paper 0.8330 ±0.0080
paper 0.8330 ±0.0080 Δ at pub 0.0560 Δ today 0.0567
108
APPNP
actual #108 vs paper #389 281 places worse
0.8787
best reported
actual #108 vs paper #389 281 places worse
paper 0.8330 ±0.0030
paper 0.8330 ±0.0030 Δ at pub 0.0440 Δ today 0.0457
223
SGC
actual #223 vs paper #606 383 places worse
0.8509 ±0.0648
best reported
actual #223 vs paper #606 383 places worse
paper 0.8100 ±0.0010

Difference within reported uncertainty; not counted as underperformance.

paper 0.8100 ±0.0010 Δ today 0.0409
308
GBP
0.8390 ±0.0070
This paper
345
GDC
actual #345 vs paper #389 44 places worse
0.8360 ±0.0020
best reported
actual #345 vs paper #389 44 places worse
paper 0.8330 ±0.0020
paper 0.8330 ±0.0020 Δ today 0.0030
473
PPRGo
0.8240 ±0.0020
This paper
550
GraphSAINT
actual #550 vs paper #583 33 places worse
0.8182 ±0.0022
best reported
actual #550 vs paper #583 33 places worse
paper 0.8130 ±0.0040
672
LADIES
0.7960 ±0.0050
This paper
724
MLP
0.7768
#ModelAccuracy ↑Paper
1
CNA
0.9575 ±0.0058
2
IS-GIB
0.9390 ±0.0187
3
EERM
0.9112 ±0.0145
20
APPNP
actual #20 vs paper #519 499 places worse
0.8142 ±0.0026
best reported
actual #20 vs paper #519 499 places worse
paper 0.7140 ±0.0060
paper 0.7140 ±0.0060 Δ at pub 0.0910 Δ today 0.1002
35
GAT
actual #35 vs paper #463 428 places worse
0.8080 ±0.0026
best reported
actual #35 vs paper #463 428 places worse
paper 0.7190 ±0.0070
paper 0.7190 ±0.0070 Δ at pub 0.0670 Δ today 0.0890
44
GCN
actual #44 vs paper #528 484 places worse
0.8033 ±0.0088
best reported
actual #44 vs paper #528 484 places worse
paper 0.7130 ±0.0040
61
GraphSAGE
0.7923 ±0.0053
96
SGC
actual #96 vs paper #474 378 places worse
0.7765 ±0.0012
best reported
actual #96 vs paper #474 378 places worse
paper 0.7180 ±0.0010
paper 0.7180 ±0.0010 Δ at pub 0.0010 Δ today 0.0585
280
GDC
actual #280 vs paper #438 158 places worse
0.7340 ±0.0030
best reported
actual #280 vs paper #438 158 places worse
paper 0.7220 ±0.0030
paper 0.7220 ±0.0030 Δ today 0.0120
342
GBP
0.7290 ±0.0050
This paper
350
MLP
0.7289 ±0.0010
530
PPRGo
0.7130 ±0.0030
This paper
589
GraphSAINT
0.7050 ±0.0040
This paper
669
LADIES
0.6860 ±0.0030
This paper
#ModelAccuracy ↑Paper
1
LGTL
0.9518 ±0.0011
2
MixHop (LO)
0.9513 ±0.0038
3
GraphSAGE (LO)
0.9511 ±0.0036
17
APPNP
actual #17 vs paper #439 422 places worse
0.9355 ±0.0060
best reported
actual #17 vs paper #439 422 places worse
paper 0.8010 ±0.0020
18
GCN
actual #18 vs paper #574 556 places worse
0.9296 ±0.0015
best reported
actual #18 vs paper #574 556 places worse
paper 0.7910 ±0.0040
20
GAT
actual #20 vs paper #675 655 places worse
0.9233 ±0.0018
best reported
actual #20 vs paper #675 655 places worse
paper 0.7800 ±0.0040
116
SAGE
0.8881 ±0.0015
141
SGC
actual #141 vs paper #585 444 places worse
0.7900 ±0.0010
actual #141 vs paper #585 444 places worse
paper 0.7900 ±0.0010
paper 0.7900 ±0.0010 Δ at pub 0.0010 Δ today 0.0932
210
MLP
0.8690 ±0.0074
400
GBP
0.8060 ±0.0040
This paper
448
PPRGo
0.8000 ±0.0040
This paper
625
GDC
actual #625 vs paper #628 3 places worse
0.7870 ±0.0040
best reported
actual #625 vs paper #628 3 places worse
paper 0.7860 ±0.0040

Difference within reported uncertainty; not counted as underperformance.

paper 0.7860 ±0.0040 Δ today 0.0010
662
GraphSAINT
0.7820 ±0.0080
This paper
740
LADIES
0.7700 ±0.0050
This paper
SOTA performance (not significantly different from the best) Proposed method (this paper) Baseline / comparison (this paper) Global context (other papers) Best at pub — reported result worse than the best known when published (best reported in green) Improved at pub — later paper surpassed this result Best today — OK at publication; today's leaderboard best is elsewhere