Oversmoothing alleviation in graph neural networks: a survey and unified view

Yufei Jin, Xingquan Zhu

Main figure for Oversmoothing alleviation in graph neural networks: a survey and unified view

Abstract

Oversmoothing is a common challenge in learning graph neural networks (GNN), where, as layers increase, embedding features learned from GNNs quickly become similar or indistinguishable, making them incapable of differentiating network proximity. A GNN with shallow layer architectures can only learn short-term relation or localized structure information, limiting its power of learning long-term connection, evidenced by their inferior learning performance on heterophilous graphs. Tackling oversmoothing is crucial for harnessing deep-layer architectures for GNNs. To date, many methods have been proposed to alleviate oversmoothing. The vast difference behind their design principles, combined with graph complications, make it difficult to understand and even compare the difference between different approaches in tackling the oversmoothing. In this paper, we propose ATNPA, a unified view with five key steps: augmentation, transformation, normalization, propagation, and aggregation, to summarize GNN oversmoothing alleviation approaches. We first propose a taxonomy for GNN oversmoothing alleviation which includes three themes to tackle oversmoothing. After that, we separate all methods into six categories, followed by detailed reviews of representative methods, including their relation to ATNPA, and discussion of their niche, strength, and weakness. The review not only draws an in-depth understanding of existing methods in the field but also shows a clear road map for future study.

Benchmark Results

Tested on 3 datasets 11 baseline values reported too low

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

Classic

#ModelAccuracy ↑Paper
1
LGTL
0.9518 ±0.0011
2
MixHop (LO)
0.9513 ±0.0038
3
GraphSAGE (LO)
0.9511 ±0.0036
17
APPNP
actual #17 vs paper #439 422 places worse
0.9355 ±0.0060
best reported
actual #17 vs paper #439 422 places worse
paper 0.8010
18
GCN
0.9296 ±0.0015
24
JKNet
actual #24 vs paper #556 532 places worse
0.9160
best reported
actual #24 vs paper #556 532 places worse
paper 0.7920
paper 0.7920 Δ at pub 0.1240
43
DropEdge
actual #43 vs paper #582 539 places worse
0.9090
best reported
actual #43 vs paper #582 539 places worse
paper 0.7906
58
GCNII
actual #58 vs paper #428 370 places worse
0.9030 ±0.0043
best reported
actual #58 vs paper #428 370 places worse
paper 0.8020
70
MixHop
actual #70 vs paper #383 313 places worse
0.9004 ±0.0141
best reported
actual #70 vs paper #383 313 places worse
paper 0.8080
best at pub: Language is All a Graph Needs (2023)
paper 0.8080 Δ at pub 0.0924
109
GRAND
actual #109 vs paper #410 301 places worse
0.8902
best reported
actual #109 vs paper #410 301 places worse
paper 0.8040
paper 0.8040 Δ at pub 0.0862
176
EGNN
actual #176 vs paper #439 263 places worse
0.8769 ±0.0028
best reported
actual #176 vs paper #439 263 places worse
paper 0.8010
paper 0.8010 Δ at pub 0.0759
210
MLP
0.8690 ±0.0074
226
DAGNN
actual #226 vs paper #403 177 places worse
0.8640
best reported
actual #226 vs paper #403 177 places worse
paper 0.8050
paper 0.8050 Δ at pub 0.0590
395
NodeNorm
0.8070
This paper
508
GroupNorm
0.7950
This paper
558
DropMessage
0.7920
This paper
676
PairNorm
actual #676 vs paper #676
0.7800
actual #676 vs paper #676
paper 0.7800
704
WeightRep
0.7768
This paper

Heterophilic Graphs

#ModelAccuracy ↑Paper
1
P^2GNN
0.9672 ±0.0147
2
DoG
0.9660 ±0.0210
3
GPF-plus
0.9583 ±0.0419
34
MLP
0.9230 ±0.0070
46
APPNP
actual #46 vs paper #438 392 places worse
0.9131 ±0.0197
best reported
actual #46 vs paper #438 392 places worse
paper 0.6541
paper 0.6541 Δ at pub 0.2590
53
GraphSAGE
0.9000 ±0.0365
58
GRN
0.8973
This paper
70
GCNII
actual #70 vs paper #275 205 places worse
0.8918 ±0.0443
best reported
actual #70 vs paper #275 205 places worse
paper 0.7784
paper 0.7784 Δ at pub 0.0262 Δ today 0.1134
97
G2-gating
0.8757
This paper
276
MixHop
actual #276 vs paper #277 1 place worse
0.7784 ±0.0773
best reported
actual #276 vs paper #277 1 place worse
paper 0.7783
best at pub: Graph Pointer Neural Networks (AAAI 2021)

Difference within reported uncertainty; not counted as underperformance.

paper 0.7783 Δ at pub 0.0001 Δ today 0.0001
392
JKNet
actual #392 vs paper #549 157 places worse
0.7000 ±0.0549
best reported
actual #392 vs paper #549 157 places worse
paper 0.5730
paper 0.5730 Δ at pub 0.0648 Δ today 0.1270
#ModelAccuracy ↑Paper
1
P^2GNN
0.9541 ±0.0272
2
ACM-GCN
0.9480 ±0.0380
3
RF-GCN
0.9429
21
APPNP
actual #21 vs paper #249 228 places worse
0.9181 ±0.0196
best reported
actual #21 vs paper #249 228 places worse
paper 0.7351
paper 0.7351 Δ at pub 0.1830
24
MLP
0.9136 ±0.0070
35
GCNII
actual #35 vs paper #218 183 places worse
0.8918 ±0.0396
best reported
actual #35 vs paper #218 183 places worse
paper 0.7649
paper 0.7649 Δ at pub 0.0777 Δ today 0.1269
45
G2-gating
0.8730
This paper
69
GRN
0.8622
This paper
138
SAGE
0.8269
183
MixHop
actual #183 vs paper #249 66 places worse
0.7950 ±0.0630
best reported
actual #183 vs paper #249 66 places worse
paper 0.7351

Difference within reported uncertainty; not counted as underperformance.

paper 0.7351 Δ at pub 0.0599
241
JKNet
actual #241 vs paper #365 124 places worse
0.6108
actual #241 vs paper #365 124 places worse
paper 0.6108

Improvement within reported uncertainty; not highlighted.

paper 0.6108 Δ at pub 0.0290 Δ today 0.1335
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) Best at pub — reported value improved over the best known when published Best today — OK at publication; today's leaderboard best is elsewhere