ICLR 2022

Learning on Large-scale Text-attributed Graphs via Variational Inference

Jianan Zhao, Meng Qu, Chaozhuo Li, Hao Yan, Qian Liu, Rui Li, Xing Xie, Jian Tang

Main figure for Learning on Large-scale Text-attributed Graphs via Variational Inference

Abstract

This paper studies learning on text-attributed graphs (TAGs), where each node is associated with a text description. An ideal solution for such a problem would be integrating both the text and graph structure information with large language models and graph neural networks (GNNs). However, the problem becomes very challenging when graphs are large due to the high computational complexity brought by training large language models and GNNs together. In this paper, we propose an efficient and effective solution to learning on large text-attributed graphs by fusing graph structure and language learning with a variational Expectation-Maximization (EM) framework, called GLEM. Instead of simultaneously training large language models and GNNs on big graphs, GLEM proposes to alternatively update the two modules in the E-step and M-step. Such a procedure allows training the two modules separately while simultaneously allowing the two modules to interact and mutually enhance each other. Extensive experiments on multiple data sets demonstrate the efficiency and effectiveness of the proposed approach..

Benchmark Results

Tested on 2 datasets

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

OGB

#ModelAccuracy ↑Paper
1
Jacobi
0.8968
2
GPR
0.8953
3
LEMP4HG
0.8939
4
SAGE
actual #4 vs paper #91 87 places worse
0.8933
best reported
actual #4 vs paper #91 87 places worse
paper 0.8233 ±0.0037
6
GCN
0.8868
16
GLEM-GNN
0.8736 ±0.0007
This paper
14
SAGN
actual #14 vs paper #14
0.8736 ±0.0007
actual #14 vs paper #14
paper 0.8736 ±0.0007
paper 0.8736 ±0.0007 Δ at pub 0.0616
45
GLEM-LM
0.8483 ±0.0004
This paper
65
GAMLP
actual #65 vs paper #71 6 places worse
0.8376 ±0.0019
best reported
actual #65 vs paper #71 6 places worse
paper 0.8354 ±0.0009

Difference within reported uncertainty; not counted as underperformance.

paper 0.8354 ±0.0009 Δ today 0.0022
157
LM-Ft
0.7963 ±0.0012
This paper
351
MLP
0.6605 ±0.0020
#ModelAccuracy ↑Paper
1
SGC
0.7910
3
GLEM-GNN
0.7036 ±0.0002
This paper
2
GAMLP
actual #2 vs paper #2
0.7036 ±0.0002
actual #2 vs paper #2
paper 0.7036 ±0.0002
paper 0.7036 ±0.0002 Δ at pub 0.0265
30
GLEM-LM
0.6671 ±0.0025
This paper
35
SAGE
0.6644 ±0.0017
95
MLP
0.4960 ±0.0030
SOTA performance (not significantly different from the best) Proposed method (this paper) Baseline / comparison (this paper) Global context (other papers) Best at pub — reported value improved over the best known when published Best today — OK at publication; today's leaderboard best is elsewhere