NeurIPS 2022

Decoupling the Depth and Scope of Graph Neural Networks

Hanqing Zeng, Muhan Zhang, Yinglong Xia, Ajitesh Srivastava, A. Malevich, R. Kannan, V. Prasanna, Long Jin, Ren Chen

Main figure for Decoupling the Depth and Scope of Graph Neural Networks

Abstract

State-of-the-art Graph Neural Networks (GNNs) have limited scalability with respect to the graph and model sizes. On large graphs, increasing the model depth often means exponential expansion of the scope (, receptive field). Beyond just a few layers, two fundamental challenges emerge: degraded expressivity due to oversmoothing, and expensive computation due to neighborhood explosion. We propose a design principle to decouple the depth and scope of GNNs -- to generate representation of a target entity (, a node or an edge), we first extract a localized subgraph as the bounded-size scope, and then apply a GNN of arbitrary depth on top of the subgraph. A properly extracted subgraph consists of a small number of critical neighbors, while excluding irrelevant ones. The GNN, no matter how deep it is, smooths the local neighborhood into informative representation rather than oversmoothing the global graph into ``white noise''. Theoretically, decoupling improves the GNN expressive power from the perspectives of graph signal processing (GCN), function approximation (GraphSAGE) and topological learning (GIN). Empirically, on seven graphs (with up to 110M nodes) and six backbone GNN architectures, our design achieves significant accuracy improvement with orders of magnitude reduction in computation and hardware cost.

Proposed method: shaDow-SAGE

Benchmark Results

Tested on 1 dataset 1 baseline value reported too low

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

OGB

#ModelHits@50 ↑Paper
1
PROXI
0.7650 ±0.0027
2
OGB Leader
0.7129 ±0.0018
3
GIDN
0.7096 ±0.0055
9
GCN
0.6621 ±0.0033
20
SEAL
actual #20 vs paper #46 26 places worse
0.6474 ±0.0043
best reported
actual #20 vs paper #46 26 places worse
paper 0.5371 ±0.0047
36
shaDow-SAGE
0.5492 ±0.0022
This paper
52
DeeperGCN
0.5273 ±0.0047
This paper
55
LRGA+GCN
actual #55 vs paper #55
0.5221 ±0.0072
actual #55 vs paper #55
paper 0.5221 ±0.0072

Improvement within reported uncertainty; not highlighted.

paper 0.5221 ±0.0072 Δ at pub 0.0001
94
MLP
0.4438 ±0.0347
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)