Neighbor Enhanced Graph Convolutional Networks for Node Classification and Recommendation

Hao Chen, Zhong Huang, Yue Xu, Zengde Deng, Feiran Huang, Peng He, Zhoujun Li

Main figure for Neighbor Enhanced Graph Convolutional Networks for Node Classification and Recommendation

Abstract

The recently proposed Graph Convolutional Networks (GCNs) have achieved significantly superior performance on various graph-related tasks, such as node classification and recommendation. However, currently researches on GCN models usually recursively aggregate the information from all the neighbors or randomly sampled neighbor subsets, without explicitly identifying whether the aggregated neighbors provide useful information during the graph convolution. In this paper, we theoretically analyze the affection of the neighbor quality over GCN models' performance and propose the Neighbor Enhanced Graph Convolutional Network (NEGCN) framework to boost the performance of existing GCN models. Our contribution is three-fold. First, we at the first time propose the concept of neighbor quality for both node classification and recommendation tasks in a general theoretical framework. Specifically, for node classification, we propose three propositions to theoretically analyze how the neighbor quality affects the node classification performance of GCN models. Second, based on the three proposed propositions, we introduce the graph refinement process including specially designed neighbor evaluation methods to increase the neighbor quality so as to boost both the node classification and recommendation tasks. Third, we conduct extensive node classification and recommendation experiments on several benchmark datasets. The experimental results verify that our proposed NEGCN framework can significantly enhance the performance for various typical GCN models on both node classification and recommendation tasks.

Proposed method: NE-GCN

Benchmark Results

Tested on 4 datasets Non-standard metric on 1 dataset

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
0.9004
53
NE-ASGCN
0.8880 ±0.0037
This paper
71
NE-SAGE
0.8840 ±0.0048
This paper
127
origin-ASGCN
0.8740 ±0.0034
This paper
169
origin-SAGE
0.8650 ±0.0062
This paper
319
NE-SGC
0.8380 ±0.0005
This paper
371
NE-GAT
0.8350 ±0.0067
This paper
396
NE-GCN
0.8330 ±0.0057
This paper
429
origin-GAT
0.8300 ±0.0075
This paper
520
origin-SGC
0.8210 ±0.0005
This paper
553
origin-GCN
0.8180 ±0.0065
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
44
GCN
0.8033 ±0.0088
48
NE-ASGCN
0.8010 ±0.0022
This paper
49
NE-SAGE
0.8000 ±0.0078
This paper
53
origin-ASGCN
0.7960 ±0.0018
This paper
78
origin-SAGE
0.7850 ±0.0081
This paper
261
NE-GAT
0.7360 ±0.0073
This paper
283
NE-SGC
0.7340 ±0.0009
This paper
296
NE-GCN
0.7330 ±0.0045
This paper
350
MLP
0.7289 ±0.0010
394
origin-GAT
0.7250 ±0.0061
This paper
464
origin-SGC
0.7190 ±0.0012
This paper
562
origin-GCN
0.7090 ±0.0032
This paper
#ModelAccuracy ↑Paper
1
LGTL
0.9518 ±0.0011
2
MixHop (LO)
0.9513 ±0.0038
3
GraphSAGE (LO)
0.9511 ±0.0036
18
GCN
0.9296 ±0.0015
23
NE-ASGCN
0.9170 ±0.0015
This paper
48
NE-SAGE
0.9070 ±0.0098
This paper
50
origin-ASGCN
0.9060 ±0.0016
This paper
145
origin-SAGE
0.8830 ±0.0114
This paper
166
NE-GCN
0.8780 ±0.0045
This paper
173
NE-SGC
0.8770 ±0.0006
This paper
211
NE-GAT
0.8690 ±0.0033
This paper
210
MLP
0.8690 ±0.0074
587
origin-GAT
0.7900 ±0.0032
This paper
603
origin-SGC
0.7890 ±0.0007
This paper
636
origin-GCN
0.7850 ±0.0049
This paper

Reddit

Global leaderboard →
Non-default metric. This paper reports Accuracy; the dataset default is F1. Values below use Accuracy only.

Sorted by Accuracy. Highlighted rows are from other papers.

#ModelAccuracy ↑Paper
1
GAP-EDP
0.9870 ±0.0003
2
NE-ASGCN
0.9758 ±0.0027
This paper
3
HSGT
0.9730 ±0.0024
21
GraphSAGE
0.9653 ±0.0011
33
ASGCN
0.9627 ±0.0032
This paper
53
NE-SGC
0.9540 ±0.0004
This paper
73
SGC
actual #73 vs paper #73
0.9490
best reported
actual #73 vs paper #73
paper 0.9488 ±0.0005

Difference within reported uncertainty; not counted as underperformance.

paper 0.9488 ±0.0005 Δ at pub 0.0002 Δ today 0.0002
147
MLP
0.8240 ±0.0010
SOTA performance (not significantly different from the best) Proposed method (this paper) Baseline / comparison (this paper) Global context (other papers)