Shared Growth of Graph Neural Networks via Prompted Free-direction Knowledge Distillation
Abstract
Knowledge distillation (KD) has shown to be effective to boost the performance of graph neural networks (GNNs), where the typical objective is to distill knowledge from a deeper teacher GNN into a shallower student GNN. However, it is often quite challenging to train a satisfactory deeper GNN due to the well-known over-parametrized and over-smoothing issues, leading to invalid knowledge transfer in practical applications. In this paper, we propose the first Free-direction Knowledge Distillation framework via reinforcement learning for GNNs, called FreeKD, which is no longer required to provide a deeper well-optimized teacher GNN. Our core idea is to collaboratively learn two shallower GNNs in an effort to exchange knowledge between them via reinforcement learning in a hierarchical way. As we observe that one typical GNN model often exhibits better and worse performances at different nodes during training, we devise a dynamic and free-direction knowledge transfer strategy that involves two levels of actions: 1) node-level action determines the directions of knowledge transfer between the corresponding nodes of two networks; and then 2) structure-level action determines which of the local structures generated by the node-level actions to be propagated. Additionally, considering that different augmented graphs can potentially capture distinct perspectives or representations of the graph data, we propose FreeKD-Prompt that learns undistorted and diverse augmentations based on prompt learning for exchanging varied knowledge. Furthermore, instead of confining knowledge exchange within two GNNs, we develop FreeKD++ and FreeKD-Prompt++ to enable free-direction knowledge transfer among multiple shallow GNNs. Extensive experiments on five benchmark datasets demonstrate our approaches outperform the base GNNs in a large margin, and shows their efficacy to various GNNs. More surprisingly, our FreeKD has comparable or even better performance than traditional KD algorithms that distill knowledge from a deeper and stronger teacher GNN.
Benchmark Results
Tested on 5 datasets 2 baseline values reported too low Non-standard metric on 4 datasets
Tables show presented results in global context (best 3 papers + GCN + MLP).
Classic
Cora
Global leaderboard →Sorted by F1. Highlighted rows are from other papers.
| # | Model | F1 ↑ | Paper |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | ACM-GCN | 0.8894
±0.0054 | |
| 2 | APPNP | 0.8880
±0.0010 | |
| 3 | GraphSAGE | 0.8810
±0.0010 | |
| 6 | GCN | 0.8790
±0.0010 best reported | best at pub: Multi-Scale Attributed Node Embedding (2019) |
| 10 | FreeKD-Prompt (GAT/GAT) | 0.8744 | This paper |
| 11 | GAT | 0.8670
±0.0020 best reported | best at pub: Multi-Scale Attributed Node Embedding (2019) |
| 14 | GIN | 0.8537
±0.0074 | |
| 15 | SAGE | 0.8536 | prev best: Graph Unlearning (2021) |
| 43 | MLP | 0.6570
±0.0190 |
CiteSeer
Global leaderboard →Sorted by F1 Score. Highlighted rows are from other papers.
| # | Model | F1 Score ↑ | Paper |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | FreeKD-Prompt (GCN/SAGE) | 0.7868 | This paper |
| 2 | Teacher GCNII | 0.7860 | This paper |
| 3 | CPF | 0.7780 | This paper |
| 4 | FreeKD | 0.7778 | This paper |
| 5 | G-CRD | 0.7762 | This paper |
| 6 | LSP | 0.7721 | This paper |
| 7 | KD | 0.7703 | This paper |
| 8 | SAGE | 0.7656 | This paper |
| 9 | RDD | 0.7602 | This paper |
| 10 | GNN-SD | 0.7596 | This paper |
| 11 | GAT | 0.7566 | This paper |
| 12 | GCN | 0.7542 | This paper |
| # | Model | F1 ↑ | Paper |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | GAMLP(JK) | 0.9982
±0.0001 | |
| 2 | GraphCON-GCN | 0.9960 | |
| 3 | GCNII | 0.9953
±0.0001 | |
| 14 | FreeKD-Prompt (GAT/GAT) | 0.9896 | This paper |
| 16 | FreeKD | 0.9879 | This paper |
| 21 | GCN | 0.9850 | |
| 57 | GAT | 0.9732
±0.0032 best reported | best at pub: HAT-GAE: Self-Supervised Graph Auto-encoders with Hierarchical Adaptive Masking and Trainable Corruption (2023) Difference within reported uncertainty; not counted as underperformance. |
| 132 | SAGE | 0.6928 | This paper |
| 173 | MLP | 0.4620 |
Heterophilic Graphs
Texas
Global leaderboard →Sorted by F1 Score. Highlighted rows are from other papers.
| # | Model | F1 Score ↑ | Paper |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | FreeKD-Prompt (SAGE-SAGE) | 0.8108 | This paper |
| 2 | FreeKD | 0.7784 | This paper |
| 3 | SAGE | 0.7622 | This paper |
| 4 | CPF | 0.6081 | This paper |
| 5 | G-CRD | 0.6054 | This paper |
| 6 | LSP | 0.5973 | This paper |
| 7 | KD | 0.5946 | This paper |
| 8 | RDD | 0.5892 | This paper |
| 9 | GNN-SD | 0.5865 | This paper |
| 10 | GAT | 0.5784 | This paper |
| 11 | GCN | 0.5757 | This paper |
Chameleon
Global leaderboard →Sorted by F1 Score. Highlighted rows are from other papers.
| # | Model | F1 Score ↑ | Paper |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | FreeKD-Prompt | 0.5050 | This paper |
| 2 | FreeKD | 0.4993 | This paper |
| 3 | SAGE | 0.4877 | This paper |
| 4 | LSP | 0.4404 | This paper |
| 5 | G-CRD | 0.4377 | This paper |
| 6 | KD | 0.4364 | This paper |
| 7 | CPF | 0.4219 | This paper |
| 8 | RDD | 0.4173 | This paper |
| 9 | GNN-SD | 0.4092 | This paper |
| 10 | GAT | 0.4029 | This paper |
| 11 | GCN | 0.3309 | This paper |
