IGNN-Solver: A Graph Neural Solver for Implicit Graph Neural Networks

Junchao Lin, Zenan Ling, Zhanbo Feng, Feng Zhou, Jingwen Xu, Robert C. Qiu

Main figure for IGNN-Solver: A Graph Neural Solver for Implicit Graph Neural Networks

Abstract

Implicit graph neural networks (IGNNs), which exhibit strong expressive power with a single layer, have recently demonstrated remarkable performance in capturing long-range dependencies (LRD) in underlying graphs while effectively mitigating the over-smoothing problem. However, IGNNs rely on computationally expensive fixed-point iterations, which lead to significant speed and scalability limitations, hindering their application to large-scale graphs. To achieve fast fixed-point solving for IGNNs, we propose a novel graph neural solver, IGNN-Solver, which leverages the generalized Anderson Acceleration method, parameterized by a tiny GNN, and learns iterative updates as a graph-dependent temporal process. To improve effectiveness on large-scale graph tasks, we further integrate sparsification and storage compression methods, specifically tailored for the IGNN-Solver, into its design. Extensive experiments demonstrate that the IGNN-Solver significantly accelerates inference on both small- and large-scale tasks, achieving a $1.5 $ to $8 $ speedup without sacrificing accuracy. This advantage becomes more pronounced as the graph scale grows, facilitating its large-scale deployment in real-world applications. The code to reproduce our results is available at.

Benchmark Results

Tested on 6 datasets 24 baseline values reported too low Non-standard metric on 2 datasets

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
6
JKNet
actual #6 vs paper #105 99 places worse
0.9702
best reported
actual #6 vs paper #105 99 places worse
paper 0.9171 ±0.0031
paper 0.9171 ±0.0031 Δ at pub 0.0531
13
GCNII
actual #13 vs paper #123 110 places worse
0.9671 ±0.0007
best reported
actual #13 vs paper #123 110 places worse
paper 0.8987 ±0.0038
paper 0.8987 ±0.0038 Δ at pub 0.0684
21
GraphSAGE
0.9653 ±0.0011
22
GAT
actual #22 vs paper #122 100 places worse
0.9650 ±0.0011
best reported
actual #22 vs paper #122 100 places worse
paper 0.9008 ±0.0044
paper 0.9008 ±0.0044 Δ at pub 0.0642 Δ today 0.0642
26
GCN
actual #26 vs paper #125 99 places worse
0.9648
best reported
actual #26 vs paper #125 99 places worse
paper 0.8965 ±0.0014
paper 0.8965 ±0.0014 Δ at pub 0.0683
71
APPNP
actual #71 vs paper #105 34 places worse
0.9500
best reported
actual #71 vs paper #105 34 places worse
paper 0.9168 ±0.0024
paper 0.9168 ±0.0024 Δ at pub 0.0332
73
SGC
actual #73 vs paper #108 35 places worse
0.9490
best reported
actual #73 vs paper #108 35 places worse
paper 0.9144 ±0.0041
paper 0.9144 ±0.0041 Δ at pub 0.0346 Δ today 0.0346
81
IGNN-Solver
0.9391 ±0.0031
This paper
101
IGNN
0.9230 ±0.0155
This paper
103
EIGNN
0.9200 ±0.0024
This paper
104
MIGNN
0.9198 ±0.0042
This paper
119
ACM-GCN
0.9037 ±0.0042
This paper
122
AM-GCN
0.9020 ±0.0034
This paper
128
DEMO-Net
0.8953 ±0.0029
This paper
147
MLP
0.8240 ±0.0010

TU Dortmund

#ModelAccuracy ↑Paper
1
MSH-GNN
0.9910 ±0.0030
2
ID-GNN+BEC
0.9830 ±0.0360
3
SupCosine
0.9830 ±0.0250
39
GIN
actual #39 vs paper #237 198 places worse
0.9330 ±0.0290
best reported
actual #39 vs paper #237 198 places worse
paper 0.8940 ±0.0560

Difference within reported uncertainty; not counted as underperformance.

paper 0.8940 ±0.0560 Δ at pub 0.0390
63
GCN
actual #63 vs paper #432 369 places worse
0.9220 ±0.0440
best reported
actual #63 vs paper #432 369 places worse
paper 0.8560 ±0.0580

Difference within reported uncertainty; not counted as underperformance.

paper 0.8560 ±0.0580 Δ at pub 0.0350 Δ today 0.0660
152
IGNN-Solver
0.9050 ±0.0160
This paper
159
WL
actual #159 vs paper #481 322 places worse
0.9040 ±0.0570
best reported
actual #159 vs paper #481 322 places worse
paper 0.8410 ±0.0190

Difference within reported uncertainty; not counted as underperformance.

paper 0.8410 ±0.0190 Δ at pub 0.0630
158
GraphSAGE
0.9040 ±0.0780
241
CGS
0.8940 ±0.0560
This paper
262
IGNN
actual #262 vs paper #695 433 places worse
0.8930 ±0.0670
best reported
actual #262 vs paper #695 433 places worse
paper 0.7600 ±0.1340
best at pub: Implicit Graph Neural Networks (NeurIPS 2020)
best today: Graph Neural Networks Gone Hogwild (ICLR 2024)

Difference within reported uncertainty; not counted as underperformance.

paper 0.7600 ±0.1340 Δ at pub 0.1330 Δ today 0.1330
259
GIND
0.8930 ±0.0740
This paper
308
FDGNN
0.8850 ±0.0380
This paper
403
MLP
0.8660 ±0.0495
425
DGCNN
actual #425 vs paper #425
0.8583 ±0.0116
best reported
actual #425 vs paper #425
paper 0.8580
467
PK
actual #467 vs paper #695 228 places worse
0.8450 ±0.0060
best reported
actual #467 vs paper #695 228 places worse
paper 0.7600 ±0.0270
best at pub: Propagation Kernels (2014)
paper 0.7600 ±0.0270 Δ at pub 0.0850
575
MIGNN
0.8180 ±0.0910
This paper
770
DCNN
0.6700
This paper
#ModelAccuracy ↑Paper
1
WL-MLP
0.9954
2
GIN
actual #2 vs paper #91 89 places worse
0.9934
best reported
actual #2 vs paper #91 89 places worse
paper 0.8270 ±0.0170
paper 0.8270 ±0.0170 Δ at pub 0.1664
3
GCN
actual #3 vs paper #214 211 places worse
0.9727
best reported
actual #3 vs paper #214 211 places worse
paper 0.8020 ±0.0200
paper 0.8020 ±0.0200 Δ at pub 0.1707
12
WL
actual #12 vs paper #27 15 places worse
0.8590 ±0.0010
best reported
actual #12 vs paper #27 15 places worse
paper 0.8450 ±0.0190
best at pub: Propagation Kernels (2014)

Difference within reported uncertainty; not counted as underperformance.

paper 0.8450 ±0.0190 Δ at pub 0.0140
28
PK
actual #28 vs paper #103 75 places worse
0.8450 ±0.0010
best reported
actual #28 vs paper #103 75 places worse
paper 0.8250 ±0.0050
best at pub: Propagation Kernels (2014)
paper 0.8250 ±0.0050 Δ at pub 0.0200
131
GraphSAGE
0.8200 ±0.0100
196
IGNN
actual #196 vs paper #442 246 places worse
0.8050 ±0.0190
best reported
actual #196 vs paper #442 246 places worse
paper 0.7350 ±0.0190
best at pub: Implicit Graph Neural Networks (NeurIPS 2020)
paper 0.7350 ±0.0190 Δ at pub 0.0700
217
IGNN-Solver
0.8020 ±0.0110
This paper
245
MIGNN
0.7960 ±0.0180
This paper
274
GIND
0.7880 ±0.0170
This paper
329
FDGNN
0.7780 ±0.0160
This paper
333
CGS
0.7760 ±0.0200
This paper
373
DGCNN
actual #373 vs paper #424 51 places worse
0.7650 ±0.0190
best reported
actual #373 vs paper #424 51 places worse
paper 0.7440

Difference within reported uncertainty; not counted as underperformance.

paper 0.7440 Δ at pub 0.0210
540
DCNN
actual #540 vs paper #540
0.6261
best reported
actual #540 vs paper #540
paper 0.6260
#ModelAccuracy ↑Paper
1
MSH-GNN
0.9410 ±0.0330
2
GRDL
0.8260 ±0.0120
3
GMN
0.8225
32
GIN
actual #32 vs paper #135 103 places worse
0.7880 ±0.0410
best reported
actual #32 vs paper #135 103 places worse
paper 0.7620 ±0.0280

Difference within reported uncertainty; not counted as underperformance.

paper 0.7620 ±0.0280 Δ at pub 0.0260
42
IGNN-Solver
0.7840 ±0.0260
This paper
52
MIGNN
0.7790 ±0.0260
This paper
56
IGNN
actual #56 vs paper #106 50 places worse
0.7770 ±0.0340
best reported
actual #56 vs paper #106 50 places worse
paper 0.7650 ±0.0340
best at pub: Graph Neural Networks Gone Hogwild (ICLR 2024)

Difference within reported uncertainty; not counted as underperformance.

paper 0.7650 ±0.0340 Δ at pub 0.0120
67
SAGE
0.7726 ±0.0228
72
GIND
0.7720 ±0.0290
This paper
94
FDGNN
0.7680 ±0.0290
This paper
127
CGS
0.7630 ±0.0490
This paper
132
DGCNN
actual #132 vs paper #190 58 places worse
0.7626
best reported
actual #132 vs paper #190 58 places worse
paper 0.7550
best at pub: Orthogonal Graph Neural Networks (AAAI 2021)
paper 0.7550 Δ at pub 0.0076
148
GCN
0.7600 ±0.0320
This paper
149
MLP
0.7600 ±0.0320
190
WL
actual #190 vs paper #275 85 places worse
0.7560 ±0.0040
best reported
actual #190 vs paper #275 85 places worse
paper 0.7470 ±0.0050
paper 0.7470 ±0.0050 Δ at pub 0.0090
328
PK
0.7370 ±0.0070
This paper
501
DCNN
0.6130
This paper

OGB

#ModelAccuracy ↑Paper
1
Jacobi
0.8968
2
GPR
0.8953
3
LEMP4HG
0.8939
4
SAGE
0.8933
6
GCN
actual #6 vs paper #319 313 places worse
0.8868
best reported
actual #6 vs paper #319 313 places worse
paper 0.7191 ±0.0027
7
JKNet
actual #7 vs paper #305 298 places worse
0.8862
best reported
actual #7 vs paper #305 298 places worse
paper 0.7370 ±0.0058
9
GAT
actual #9 vs paper #316 307 places worse
0.8829
best reported
actual #9 vs paper #316 307 places worse
paper 0.7233 ±0.0032
13
GCNII
actual #13 vs paper #311 298 places worse
0.8738
best reported
actual #13 vs paper #311 298 places worse
paper 0.7288 ±0.0018
29
APPNP
actual #29 vs paper #287 258 places worse
0.8634
best reported
actual #29 vs paper #287 258 places worse
paper 0.7446 ±0.0064
94
SGC
actual #94 vs paper #333 239 places worse
0.8220 ±0.0090
best reported
actual #94 vs paper #333 239 places worse
paper 0.7048 ±0.0019
paper 0.7048 ±0.0019 Δ at pub 0.1172
275
IGNN-Solver
0.7490 ±0.0020
This paper
282
IGNN
0.7463 ±0.0024
This paper
283
MIGNN
0.7462 ±0.0032
This paper
285
EIGNN
0.7458 ±0.0026
This paper
303
DEMO-Net
0.7388 ±0.0062
This paper
310
AM-GCN
0.7319 ±0.0049
This paper
321
ACM-GCN
0.7168 ±0.0041
This paper
351
MLP
0.6605 ±0.0020

Heterogeneous Graph Benchmarks

ACM

Global leaderboard →
Non-default metric. This paper reports Accuracy; the dataset default is Micro-F1. Values below use Accuracy only.

Sorted by Accuracy. Highlighted rows are from other papers.

#ModelAccuracy ↑Paper
1
SignGT
0.9545 ±0.0049
2
NodeFormer
0.9493 ±0.0035
3
FAGCN
0.9487 ±0.0059
7
GAT
actual #7 vs paper #64 57 places worse
0.9424 ±0.0043
best reported
actual #7 vs paper #64 57 places worse
paper 0.8060 ±0.0512
paper 0.8060 ±0.0512 Δ at pub 0.1364
26
SGC
actual #26 vs paper #60 34 places worse
0.9324 ±0.0049
best reported
actual #26 vs paper #60 34 places worse
paper 0.8540 ±0.0123
paper 0.8540 ±0.0123 Δ at pub 0.0784
31
ACM-GCN
actual #31 vs paper #52 21 places worse
0.9304 ±0.0128
best reported
actual #31 vs paper #52 21 places worse
paper 0.8898 ±0.0041
paper 0.8898 ±0.0041 Δ at pub 0.0406
32
APPNP
actual #32 vs paper #63 31 places worse
0.9300 ±0.0055
best reported
actual #32 vs paper #63 31 places worse
paper 0.8416 ±0.0425
paper 0.8416 ±0.0425 Δ at pub 0.0884
34
GCN
actual #34 vs paper #63 29 places worse
0.9233 ±0.0038
best reported
actual #34 vs paper #63 29 places worse
paper 0.8378 ±0.0395
paper 0.8378 ±0.0395 Δ at pub 0.0855
40
IGNN-Solver (AA)
0.9134 ±0.0046
This paper
44
IGNN
0.9088 ±0.0095
This paper
49
MIGNN
0.8959 ±0.0161
This paper
50
AM-GCN
0.8956 ±0.0030
This paper
55
EIGNN
0.8836 ±0.0103
This paper
61
GCNII
0.8536 ±0.0105
This paper
63
DEMO-Net
0.8438 ±0.0219
This paper
67
GraphSAGE
0.7529 ±0.0020
71
JKNet
0.6496 ±0.0547
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