Graph Learning at Scale: Characterizing and Optimizing Pre-Propagation GNNs

Zichao Yue, Chenhui Deng, Zhiru Zhang

Main figure for Graph Learning at Scale: Characterizing and Optimizing Pre-Propagation GNNs

Abstract

Graph neural networks (GNNs) are widely used for learning node embeddings in graphs, typically adopting a message-passing scheme. This approach, however, leads to the neighbor explosion problem, with exponentially growing computational and memory demands as layers increase. Graph sampling has become the predominant method for scaling GNNs to large graphs, mitigating but not fully solving the issue. Pre-propagation GNNs (PP-GNNs) represent a new class of models that decouple feature propagation from training through pre-processing, addressing neighbor explosion in theory. Yet, their practical advantages and system-level optimizations remain underexplored. This paper provides a comprehensive characterization of PP-GNNs, comparing them with graph-sampling-based methods in training efficiency, scalability, and accuracy. While PP-GNNs achieve comparable accuracy, we identify data loading as the key bottleneck for training efficiency and input expansion as a major scalability challenge. To address these issues, we propose optimized data loading schemes and tailored training methods that improve PP-GNN training throughput by an average of 15$ $ over the PP-GNN baselines, with speedup of up to 2 orders of magnitude compared to sampling-based GNNs on large graph benchmarks. Our implementation is publicly available at.

Benchmark Results

Tested on 2 datasets

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

OGB

#ModelAccuracy ↑Paper
1
SGC
0.7910
2
GAMLP
0.7036 ±0.0002
3
GLEM-GNN
0.7036 ±0.0002
26
HOGA
0.6686 ±0.0011
This paper
35
SAGE
actual #35 vs paper #35
0.6644 ±0.0017
actual #35 vs paper #35
paper 0.6644 ±0.0017
38
SIGN
actual #38 vs paper #38
0.6636 ±0.0005
actual #38 vs paper #38
paper 0.6636 ±0.0005
paper 0.6636 ±0.0005 Δ at pub 0.0068
52
GraphSAGE
0.6580
95
MLP
0.4960 ±0.0030

LINKX Benchmarks

#ModelAccuracy ↑Paper
1
SAGE
0.8597 ±0.0021
2
Polynormer
0.8595 ±0.0007
3
NID_SAGE
0.8563 ±0.0031
8
HOGA
0.8191
This paper
11
SIGN
0.8101
This paper
23
GCN
0.7601 ±0.0049
31
MLP
0.7048 ±0.0077
SOTA performance (not significantly different from the best) Baseline / comparison (this paper) Global context (other papers) Best at pub — reported value improved over the best known when published