NeurIPS 2023

Structure-free Graph Condensation: From Large-scale Graphs to Condensed Graph-free Data

Xin Zheng, Miao Zhang, C. Chen, Q. Nguyen, Xingquan Zhu, Shirui Pan

Main figure for Structure-free Graph Condensation: From Large-scale Graphs to Condensed Graph-free Data

Abstract

Graph condensation, which reduces the size of a large-scale graph by synthesizing a small-scale condensed graph as its substitution, has immediate benefits for various graph learning tasks. However, existing graph condensation methods rely on the joint optimization of nodes and structures in the condensed graph, and overlook critical issues in effectiveness and generalization ability. In this paper, we advocate a new Structure-Free Graph Condensation paradigm, named SFGC, to distill a large-scale graph into a small-scale graph node set without explicit graph structures,, graph-free data. Our idea is to implicitly encode topology structure information into the node attributes in the synthesized graph-free data, whose topology is reduced to an identity matrix. Specifically, SFGC contains two collaborative components: (1) a training trajectory meta-matching scheme for effectively synthesizing small-scale graph-free data; (2) a graph neural feature score metric for dynamically evaluating the quality of the condensed data. Through training trajectory meta-matching, SFGC aligns the long-term GNN learning behaviors between the large-scale graph and the condensed small-scale graph-free data, ensuring comprehensive and compact transfer of informative knowledge to the graph-free data. Afterward, the underlying condensed graph-free data would be dynamically evaluated with the graph neural feature score, which is a closed-form metric for ensuring the excellent expressiveness of the condensed graph-free data. Extensive experiments verify the superiority of SFGC across different condensation ratios.

Proposed method: SFGC

Benchmark Results

Tested on 1 dataset 1 baseline value 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
21
GraphSAGE
0.9653 ±0.0011
113
Random
actual #113 vs paper #166 53 places worse
0.9110
best reported
actual #113 vs paper #166 53 places worse
paper 0.4610 ±0.0440
120
GCond
actual #120 vs paper #135 15 places worse
0.9030 ±0.0310
best reported
actual #120 vs paper #135 15 places worse
paper 0.8800 ±0.0180

Difference within reported uncertainty; not counted as underperformance.

paper 0.8800 ±0.0180 Δ today 0.0230
125
SFGC
0.8970 ±0.0020
This paper
130
GCond-X
actual #130 vs paper #133 3 places worse
0.8934 ±0.0054
best reported
actual #130 vs paper #133 3 places worse
paper 0.8840 ±0.0040

Difference within reported uncertainty; not counted as underperformance.

paper 0.8840 ±0.0040 Δ today 0.0094
134
DC-Graph
0.8820 ±0.0020
This paper
147
MLP
0.8240 ±0.0010
153
Herding
actual #153 vs paper #164 11 places worse
0.7140 ±0.0160
best reported
actual #153 vs paper #164 11 places worse
paper 0.5310 ±0.0250
best today: Simple Graph Condensation (2024)
paper 0.5310 ±0.0250 Δ today 0.1830
161
K-Center
actual #161 vs paper #165 4 places worse
0.5740 ±0.0180
best reported
actual #161 vs paper #165 4 places worse
paper 0.4660 ±0.0230
best today: Simple Graph Condensation (2024)
paper 0.4660 ±0.0230 Δ today 0.1080
167
Coarsening
0.4090 ±0.0050
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