NeurIPS 2022

Old can be Gold: Better Gradient Flow can Make Vanilla-GCNs Great Again

Ajay Jaiswal, Peihao Wang, Tianlong Chen, Justin F. Rousseau, Ying Ding, Zhangyang Wang

Main figure for Old can be Gold: Better Gradient Flow can Make Vanilla-GCNs Great Again

Abstract

Despite the enormous success of Graph Convolutional Networks (GCNs) in modeling graph-structured data, most of the current GCNs are shallow due to the notoriously challenging problems of over-smoothening and information squashing along with conventional difficulty caused by vanishing gradients and over-fitting. Previous works have been primarily focused on the study of over-smoothening and over-squashing phenomena in training deep GCNs. Surprisingly, in comparison with CNNs/RNNs, very limited attention has been given to understanding how healthy gradient flow can benefit the trainability of deep GCNs. In this paper, firstly, we provide a new perspective of gradient flow to understand the substandard performance of deep GCNs and hypothesize that by facilitating healthy gradient flow, we can significantly improve their trainability, as well as achieve state-of-the-art (SOTA) level performance from vanilla-GCNs. Next, we argue that blindly adopting the Glorot initialization for GCNs is not optimal, and derive a topology-aware isometric initialization scheme for vanilla-GCNs based on the principles of isometry. Additionally, contrary to ad-hoc addition of skip-connections, we propose to use gradient-guided dynamic rewiring of vanilla-GCNs with skip connections. Our dynamic rewiring method uses the gradient flow within each layer during training to introduce on-demand skip-connections adaptively. We provide extensive empirical evidence across multiple datasets that our methods improve gradient flow in deep vanilla-GCNs and significantly boost their performance to comfortably compete and outperform many fancy state-of-the-art methods. Codes are available at:.

Benchmark Results

Tested on 5 datasets 16 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
0.9004
44
GAT
actual #44 vs paper #536 492 places worse
0.8897 ±0.0014
best reported
actual #44 vs paper #536 492 places worse
paper 0.8190
45
GCNII
actual #45 vs paper #203 158 places worse
0.8893 ±0.0137
best reported
actual #45 vs paper #203 158 places worse
paper 0.8550
best at pub: Orthogonal Graph Neural Networks (AAAI 2021)
paper 0.8550 Δ at pub 0.0299 Δ today 0.0343
55
JKNet
actual #55 vs paper #688 633 places worse
0.8870
best reported
actual #55 vs paper #688 633 places worse
paper 0.7920
paper 0.7920 Δ at pub 0.0950
223
SGC
actual #223 vs paper #686 463 places worse
0.8509 ±0.0648
best reported
actual #223 vs paper #686 463 places worse
paper 0.7930
420
topology-aware isometric initialization and Gradient-guided rewiring
0.8310 ±0.0025
This paper
562
InceptionGCN
0.8170
This paper
602
Vanilla-GCN
0.8110
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
actual #44 vs paper #519 475 places worse
0.8033 ±0.0088
best reported
actual #44 vs paper #519 475 places worse
paper 0.7140
61
GraphSAGE
0.7923 ±0.0053
350
MLP
0.7289 ±0.0010
481
GCN + Our Init
0.7170
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
actual #18 vs paper #585 567 places worse
0.9296 ±0.0015
best reported
actual #18 vs paper #585 567 places worse
paper 0.7900
20
GAT
actual #20 vs paper #646 626 places worse
0.9233 ±0.0018
best reported
actual #20 vs paper #646 626 places worse
paper 0.7840
24
JKNet
actual #24 vs paper #694 670 places worse
0.9160
best reported
actual #24 vs paper #694 670 places worse
paper 0.7780
paper 0.7780 Δ at pub 0.1380
58
GCNII
actual #58 vs paper #428 370 places worse
0.9030 ±0.0043
best reported
actual #58 vs paper #428 370 places worse
paper 0.8020
116
SAGE
0.8881 ±0.0015
141
SGC
actual #141 vs paper #675 534 places worse
0.8832 ±0.0055
best reported
actual #141 vs paper #675 534 places worse
paper 0.7800
210
MLP
0.8690 ±0.0074
436
topology-aware isometric initialization and Gradient-guided rewiring
0.8020 ±0.1600
This paper
633
InceptionGCN
0.7850
This paper

Heterophilic Graphs

#ModelAccuracy ↑Paper
1
P^2GNN
0.9672 ±0.0147
2
DoG
0.9660 ±0.0210
3
GPF-plus
0.9583 ±0.0419
34
MLP
0.9230 ±0.0070
46
APPNP
actual #46 vs paper #493 447 places worse
0.9131 ±0.0197
best reported
actual #46 vs paper #493 447 places worse
paper 0.6068 ±0.0450
paper 0.6068 ±0.0450 Δ at pub 0.2996 Δ today 0.3063
53
GraphSAGE
0.9000 ±0.0365
70
GCNII
actual #70 vs paper #400 330 places worse
0.8918 ±0.0443
best reported
actual #70 vs paper #400 330 places worse
paper 0.6919 ±0.0656
paper 0.6919 ±0.0656 Δ at pub 0.1127 Δ today 0.1999
211
GAT
actual #211 vs paper #623 412 places worse
0.8162 ±0.0645
best reported
actual #211 vs paper #623 412 places worse
paper 0.1154 ±0.0072
paper 0.1154 ±0.0072 Δ at pub 0.6826 Δ today 0.7008
257
GCN
actual #257 vs paper #499 242 places worse
0.7933 ±0.0447
best reported
actual #257 vs paper #499 242 places worse
paper 0.6012 ±0.0422
best today: Graph Wave Networks (WWW 2025)
paper 0.6012 ±0.0422 Δ at pub 0.1828 Δ today 0.1921
330
SGC
actual #330 vs paper #557 227 places worse
0.7440 ±0.0600
best reported
actual #330 vs paper #557 227 places worse
paper 0.5641 ±0.0425
paper 0.5641 ±0.0425 Δ at pub 0.1799
392
JKNet
actual #392 vs paper #489 97 places worse
0.7000 ±0.0549
best reported
actual #392 vs paper #489 97 places worse
paper 0.6108 ±0.0623

Difference within reported uncertainty; not counted as underperformance.

paper 0.6108 ±0.0623 Δ at pub 0.0270 Δ today 0.0892
449
topology-aware initialization and gradient-guided rewiring
0.6428 ±0.0293
This paper
#ModelAccuracy ↑Paper
1
P^2GNN
0.9541 ±0.0272
2
ACM-GCN
0.9480 ±0.0380
3
RF-GCN
0.9429
24
MLP
0.9136 ±0.0070
138
SAGE
0.8269
158
GAT
actual #158 vs paper #578 420 places worse
0.8190 ±0.0540
best reported
actual #158 vs paper #578 420 places worse
paper 0.1978 ±0.0142
paper 0.1978 ±0.0142 Δ at pub 0.6212
170
GCN
actual #170 vs paper #438 268 places worse
0.8082 ±0.0360
best reported
actual #170 vs paper #438 268 places worse
paper 0.5405 ±0.0711
paper 0.5405 ±0.0711 Δ at pub 0.2515 Δ today 0.2677
396
topology-aware isometric initialization and Gradient-guided rewiring
0.5851 ±0.0166
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) Best today — OK at publication; today's leaderboard best is elsewhere