Two Trades are not Baffled: Condensing Graph via Crafting Rational Gradient Matching
Abstract
Training on large-scale graphs has achieved remarkable results in graph representation learning, but its cost and storage have raised growing concerns. As one of the most promising directions, graph condensation methods address these issues by employing gradient matching, aiming to condense the full graph into a more concise yet information-rich synthetic set. Though encouraging, these strategies primarily emphasize matching directions of the gradients, which leads to deviations in the training trajectories. Such deviations are further magnified by the differences between the condensation and evaluation phases, culminating in accumulated errors, which detrimentally affect the performance of the condensed graphs. In light of this, we propose a novel graph condensation method named CrafTing RationaL trajectory (CTRL), which offers an optimized starting point closer to the original dataset's feature distribution and a more refined strategy for gradient matching. Theoretically, CTRL can effectively neutralize the impact of accumulated errors on the performance of condensed graphs. We provide extensive experiments on various graph datasets and downstream tasks to support the effectiveness of CTRL.
Benchmark Results
Tested on 6 datasets 3 baseline values reported too low Non-standard metric on 1 dataset
Tables show presented results in global context (best 3 papers + GCN + MLP).
Classic
| # | Model | Accuracy ↑ | 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 | |
| 523 | Random | 0.8209
±0.0008 best reported | best at pub: NAS-Bench-Graph: Benchmarking Graph Neural Architecture Search (NeurIPS 2022) |
| 541 | CTRL | 0.8190
±0.0010 | This paper |
| 560 | SFGC | 0.8170
±0.0050 | prev best: Navigating Complexity: Toward Lossless Graph Condensation via Expanding Window Matching (ICML 2024) |
| 615 | GCond | 0.8010
±0.0060 | prev best: EXGC: Bridging Efficiency and Explainability in Graph Condensation (WWW 2024) |
| 724 | MLP | 0.7768 | |
| 742 | Herding | 0.7680
±0.0010 | This paper |
| 743 | K-Center | 0.7670
±0.0010 | This paper |
| 817 | Coarsening | 0.7060
±0.0010 | This paper |
| # | Model | Accuracy ↑ | Paper |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | CNA | 0.9575
±0.0058 | |
| 2 | IS-GIB | 0.9390
±0.0187 | |
| 3 | EERM | 0.9112
±0.0145 | |
| 44 | GCN | 0.8033
±0.0088 | |
| 277 | CTRL | 0.7350
±0.0010 | This paper |
| 350 | MLP | 0.7289
±0.0010 | |
| 415 | SFGC | 0.7240
±0.0040 best reported | best today: Simple Graph Condensation (2024) |
| 572 | GCond | 0.7080
±0.0450 best reported | best at pub: Condensing Graphs via One-Step Gradient Matching (KDD 2022) best today: TinyGraph: Joint Feature and Node Condensation for Graph Neural Networks (2024) Difference within reported uncertainty; not counted as underperformance. |
| 593 | Random | 0.7049
±0.0008 best reported | best at pub: NAS-Bench-Graph: Benchmarking Graph Neural Architecture Search (NeurIPS 2022) |
| 650 | K-Center | 0.5240
±0.0280 | prev best: EXGC: Bridging Efficiency and Explainability in Graph Condensation (WWW 2024) best today: Simple Graph Condensation (2024) |
| 651 | Herding | 0.5710
±0.0150 | prev best: EXGC: Bridging Efficiency and Explainability in Graph Condensation (WWW 2024) best today: Simple Graph Condensation (2024) |
| 726 | DC-Graph | 0.6680
±0.0150 | This paper |
| 864 | Coarsening | 0.5220
±0.0040 | This paper |
TU Dortmund
| # | Model | Accuracy ↑ | Paper |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | MSH-GNN | 0.9910
±0.0030 | |
| 2 | ID-GNN+BEC | 0.9830
±0.0360 | |
| 3 | SupCosine | 0.9830
±0.0250 | |
| 39 | GIN | 0.9330
±0.0290 | |
| 303 | Whole Dataset | 0.8863
±0.0144 | This paper |
| 403 | MLP | 0.8660
±0.0495 |
| # | Model | Accuracy ↑ | Paper |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | WL-MLP | 0.9954 | |
| 2 | GIN | 0.9934 | |
| 3 | GCN | 0.9727 | |
| 131 | GraphSAGE | 0.8200
±0.0100 | |
| 358 | Random | 0.7700
±0.0170 best reported | best at pub: Higher-order Clustering and Pooling for Graph Neural Networks (2022) |
| 464 | Whole Dataset | 0.7170
±0.0020 | This paper |
| 551 | CTRL | 0.6014
±0.0173 | This paper |
| 552 | DosCond | 0.6007
±0.0158 | This paper |
| 561 | Herding | 0.5894
±0.0083 | This paper |
| 567 | K-Center | 0.5658
±0.0308 | This paper |
| 576 | DCG | 0.5217
±0.0190 | This paper |
OGB
| # | Model | ROC-AUC ↑ | Paper |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Multi-RF Fusion with Multi-GNN Blending | 0.8476
±0.0002 | |
| 2 | HyperFusion | 0.8475
±0.0003 | |
| 3 | PAS+FPs | 0.8420
±0.0015 | |
| 9 | GatedGCN | 0.8090
±0.0160 | |
| 109 | GIN | 0.7780
±0.0182 | |
| 214 | Whole Dataset | 0.7570
±0.0080 | This paper |
| 263 | CTRL | 0.7370
±0.0060 | This paper |
| 271 | DosCond | 0.7310
±0.0040 | This paper |
| 277 | DCG | 0.7280
±0.0020 | prev best: Condensing Graphs via One-Step Gradient Matching (KDD 2022) Improvement within reported uncertainty; not highlighted. |
| 280 | Herding | 0.7250
±0.0060 | prev best: Condensing Graphs via One-Step Gradient Matching (KDD 2022) Improvement within reported uncertainty; not highlighted. |
| 281 | K-Center | 0.7250
±0.0060 | prev best: Condensing Graphs via One-Step Gradient Matching (KDD 2022) Improvement within reported uncertainty; not highlighted. |
| 284 | Random | 0.7210
±0.0140 | prev best: Condensing Graphs via One-Step Gradient Matching (KDD 2022) Improvement within reported uncertainty; not highlighted. |
ogbg-molpcba
Global leaderboard →Sorted by ROC-AUC. Highlighted rows are from other papers.
| # | Model | ROC-AUC ↑ | Paper |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | PrunE | 0.8159
±0.0535 | |
| 2 | EGTAS | 0.7919
±0.0137 | |
| 3 | UGTs | 0.7840 | |
| 12 | GIN | 0.7042
±0.0478 | |
| 29 | CTRL | 0.6500
±0.0050 | This paper |
| 31 | Whole Dataset | 0.6460
±0.0040 | This paper |
| 33 | DosCond | 0.6200
±0.0070 | This paper |
| 34 | Herding | 0.6170
±0.0030 | This paper |
| 35 | Random | 0.6060
±0.0200 | This paper |
| 36 | DCG | 0.5790
±0.0320 | This paper |
| 37 | K-Center | 0.5760
±0.0190 | This paper |
