Efficient Learning on Large Graphs using a Densifying Regularity Lemma
Abstract
Learning on large graphs presents significant challenges, with traditional Message Passing Neural Networks suffering from computational and memory costs scaling linearly with the number of edges. We introduce the Intersecting Block Graph (IBG), a low-rank factorization of large directed graphs based on combinations of intersecting bipartite components, each consisting of a pair of communities, for source and target nodes. By giving less weight to non-edges, we show how an IBG can efficiently approximate any graph, sparse or dense. Specifically, we prove a constructive version of the weak regularity lemma: for any chosen accuracy, every graph can be approximated by a dense IBG whose rank depends only on that accuracy. This improves over prior versions of the lemma, where the rank depended on the number of nodes for sparse graphs. Our method allows for efficient approximation of large graphs that are both directed and sparse, a crucial capability for many real-world applications. We then introduce a graph neural network architecture operating on the IBG representation of the graph and demonstrating competitive performance on node classification, spatio-temporal graph analysis, and knowledge graph completion, while having memory and computational complexity linear in the number of nodes rather than edges.
Benchmark Results
Tested on 4 datasets 7 baseline values reported too low
Tables show presented results in global context (best 3 papers + GCN + MLP).
Heterophilic Graphs
| # | Model | Accuracy ↑ | Paper |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Hetero-S (GAT 8-layer) | 0.8693 | |
| 2 | Dir-GNN+CNA | 0.8586
±0.0180 | |
| 3 | GAT | 0.8560 best reported | best at pub: The Heterophilic Snowflake Hypothesis: Training and Empowering GNNs for Heterophilic Graphs (KDD 2024) |
| 8 | FaberNet | 0.8033
±0.0119 | This paper |
| 9 | IBG-NN | 0.8015
±0.0113 | This paper |
| 15 | DirGNN | 0.7974
±0.0140 | |
| 24 | GPR-GNN | 0.7830
±0.0060 | prev best: Block Modeling-Guided Graph Convolutional Neural Networks (AAAI 2021) |
| 25 | FSGNN | 0.7827
±0.0128 | prev best: SCNode: Spatial and Contextual Coordinates for Graph Representation Learning (TMLR 2024) |
| 45 | GloGNN | 0.7133
±0.0242 best reported | best at pub: GPNet: Simplifying Graph Neural Networks via Multi-channel Geometric Polynomials (2022) best today: $P^2$GNN: Two Prototype Sets to boost GNN Performance (2026) Difference within reported uncertainty; not counted as underperformance. |
| 52 | GCN | 0.7033 best reported | best at pub: Understanding Heterophily for Graph Neural Networks (ICML 2024) |
| 102 | ICG-NN | 0.6390
±0.0213 | This paper |
| 108 | SAGE | 0.6340
±0.0300 | |
| 133 | H2GCN | 0.6030
±0.0231 best reported | best at pub: Optimization-Induced Graph Implicit Nonlinear Diffusion (ICML 2022) |
| 169 | MLP | 0.5429 best reported | best at pub: Understanding Heterophily for Graph Neural Networks (ICML 2024) |
| # | Model | Accuracy ↑ | Paper |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | IBG-NN | 0.7763
±0.0179 | This paper |
| 2 | Dir-GNN+CNA | 0.7747
±0.0128 | |
| 3 | DHGNN | 0.7684
±0.0161 | |
| 4 | FaberNet | 0.7671
±0.0192 | This paper |
| 9 | DirGNN | 0.7513
±0.0195 | |
| 10 | GPR-GNN | 0.7480
±0.0050 | prev best: Optimizing Polynomial Graph Filters: A Novel Adaptive Krylov Subspace Approach (WWW 2024) |
| 11 | FSGNN | 0.7416 best reported | best at pub: Simplifying approach to Node Classification in Graph Neural Networks (2021) Difference within reported uncertainty; not counted as underperformance. |
| 19 | GloGNN | 0.7121
±0.0184 best reported | best at pub: GPNet: Simplifying Graph Neural Networks via Multi-channel Geometric Polynomials (2022) best today: Directed Homophily-Aware Graph Neural Network (2025) |
| 34 | ICG-NN | 0.6402
±0.0167 | This paper |
| 39 | H2GCN | 0.6190
±0.0140 | |
| 46 | GCN | 0.6067 best reported | best at pub: Understanding Heterophily for Graph Neural Networks (ICML 2024) |
| 67 | GAT | 0.5630
±0.0220 best reported | best at pub: Restructuring Graphs for Higher Homophily via Adaptive Spectral Clustering (AAAI 2022) |
| 120 | SAGE | 0.4460
±0.0130 | |
| 172 | MLP | 0.3930
±0.0079 best reported | best at pub: Understanding Heterophily for Graph Neural Networks (ICML 2024) |
Heterophily Benchmark
| # | Model | ROC-AUC ↑ | Paper |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Polynormer-r | 0.8591
±0.0074 | |
| 2 | DC-GNN | 0.8588
±0.0081 | |
| 3 | TANGO-GPS | 0.8566
±0.0101 | |
| 28 | GAT | 0.8443
±0.0100 best reported | best at pub: TopoBench: A Framework for Benchmarking Topological Deep Learning (2024) Difference within reported uncertainty; not counted as underperformance. |
| 44 | IBG-NN | 0.8376
±0.0051 | This paper |
| 46 | ICG-NN | 0.8373
±0.0078 | This paper |
| 50 | GCN | 0.8364
±0.0067 | This paper |
| 76 | SAGE | 0.8243
±0.0044 | |
| 113 | H2GCN | 0.7815 best reported | best at pub: Graph Neural Networks for Graphs with Heterophily: A Survey (2022) |
| 139 | MLP | 0.7362
±0.0020 best reported | best at pub: Evolving Computation Graphs (ICML 2023) best today: Gumbel-MPNN: Graph Rewiring with Gumbel-Softmax (2025) Difference within reported uncertainty; not counted as underperformance. |
| 140 | GloGNN | 0.7339
±0.0117 | This paper |
| 143 | GPR-GNN | 0.7294
±0.0097 | This paper |
LINKX Benchmarks
| # | Model | Accuracy ↑ | Paper |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | LargeScaleNet | 0.6582
±0.0036 | |
| 2 | S² DirGCN | 0.6495
±0.0033 | |
| 3 | FaberNet | 0.6462
±0.0101 | |
| 10 | IBG-NN | 0.6014 | This paper |
| 31 | GCN | 0.4602
±0.0026 | |
| 56 | MLP | 0.3670
±0.0021 |
