ICML 2022

RSC: Accelerate Graph Neural Networks Training via Randomized Sparse Computations

Zirui Liu, Sheng-Wei Chen, Kaixiong Zhou, D. Zha, Xiao Huang, Xia Hu

Main figure for RSC: Accelerate Graph Neural Networks Training via Randomized Sparse Computations

Abstract

Training graph neural networks (GNNs) is extremely time-consuming because sparse graph-based operations are hard to be accelerated by community hardware. Prior art successfully reduces the computation cost of dense matrix based operations (e.g., convolution and linear) via sampling-based approximation. However, unlike dense matrices, sparse matrices are stored in an irregular data format such that each row/column may have a different number of non-zero entries. Thus, compared to the dense counterpart, approximating sparse operations has two unique challenges (1) we cannot directly control the efficiency of approximated sparse operation since the computation is only executed on non-zero entries; (2) sampling sparse matrices is much more inefficient due to the irregular data format. To address the issues, our key idea is to control the accuracy-efficiency trade-off by optimizing computation resource allocation layer-wisely and epoch-wisely. For the first challenge, we customize the computation resource to different sparse operations, while limiting the total used resource below a certain budget. For the second challenge, we cache previously sampled sparse matrices to reduce the epoch-wise sampling overhead. To this end, we propose Randomized Sparse Computation. In practice, can achieve up to $11.6 $ speedup for a single sparse operation and $1.6 $ end-to-end wall-clock time speedup with almost no accuracy drop. Codes are available at.

Benchmark Results

Tested on 1 dataset 2 baseline values reported too low Non-standard metric on 1 dataset

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

Classic

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
3
HSGT
0.9730 ±0.0024
13
GCNII
0.9671 ±0.0007
This paper
17
GraphSAGE (full batch)
0.9661 ±0.0005
This paper
18
GraphSAINT
actual #18 vs paper #29 11 places worse
0.9660 ±0.0010
best reported
actual #18 vs paper #29 11 places worse
paper 0.9640 ±0.0003
paper 0.9640 ±0.0003 Δ at pub 0.0020 Δ today 0.0020
21
GraphSAGE
0.9653 ±0.0011
25
GCNII + RSC
0.9650 ±0.0012
This paper
26
GCN
actual #26 vs paper #53 27 places worse
0.9648
best reported
actual #26 vs paper #53 27 places worse
paper 0.9533 ±0.0003
paper 0.9533 ±0.0003 Δ at pub 0.0115
36
GraphSAINT + RSC
0.9624 ±0.0003
This paper
66
GCN + RSC
0.9513 ±0.0005
This paper
147
MLP
0.8240 ±0.0010
SOTA performance (not significantly different from the best) Baseline / comparison (this paper) Global context (other papers) Best at pub — reported result worse than the best known when published (best reported in green)