SOTAVerified

Break the Ceiling: Stronger Multi-scale Deep Graph Convolutional Networks

2019-06-05NeurIPS 2019Code Available0· sign in to hype

Sitao Luan, Mingde Zhao, Xiao-Wen Chang, Doina Precup

Code Available — Be the first to reproduce this paper.

Reproduce

Code

Abstract

Recently, neural network based approaches have achieved significant improvement for solving large, complex, graph-structured problems. However, their bottlenecks still need to be addressed, and the advantages of multi-scale information and deep architectures have not been sufficiently exploited. In this paper, we theoretically analyze how existing Graph Convolutional Networks (GCNs) have limited expressive power due to the constraint of the activation functions and their architectures. We generalize spectral graph convolution and deep GCN in block Krylov subspace forms and devise two architectures, both with the potential to be scaled deeper but each making use of the multi-scale information in different ways. We further show that the equivalence of these two architectures can be established under certain conditions. On several node classification tasks, with or without the help of validation, the two new architectures achieve better performance compared to many state-of-the-art methods.

Tasks

Benchmark Results

DatasetModelMetricClaimedVerifiedStatus
CiteSeer (0.5%)Truncated KrylovAccuracy64.64Unverified
CiteSeer (0.5%)Snowball (linear)Accuracy59.41Unverified
CiteSeer (0.5%)Snowball (linear + tanh)Accuracy61.99Unverified
CiteSeer (0.5%)Snowball (tanh)Accuracy62.05Unverified
CiteSeer (1%)Truncated KrylovAccuracy69.03Unverified
CiteSeer (1%)Snowball (tanh)Accuracy64.23Unverified
CiteSeer (1%)Snowball (linear)Accuracy65.85Unverified
CiteSeer (1%)Snowball (linear + tanh)Accuracy67.07Unverified
CiteSeer with Public Split: fixed 20 nodes per classSnowball (tanh)Accuracy73.32Unverified
CiteSeer with Public Split: fixed 20 nodes per classSnowball (linear)Accuracy72.85Unverified
CiteSeer with Public Split: fixed 20 nodes per classTruncated KrylovAccuracy73.86Unverified
Cora (0.5%)Snowball (linear)Accuracy69.99Unverified
Cora (0.5%)Truncated KrylovAccuracy74.89Unverified
Cora (0.5%)Snowball (tanh)Accuracy71.36Unverified
Cora (0.5%)Snowball (linear + tanh)Accuracy67.76Unverified
Cora (1%)Truncated KrylovAccuracy78.15Unverified
Cora (1%)Snowball (linear)Accuracy73.1Unverified
Cora (1%)Snowball (tanh)Accuracy74.78Unverified
Cora (1%)Snowball (linear + tanh)Accuracy74.79Unverified
Cora (3%)Truncated KrylovAccuracy81.92Unverified
Cora (3%)Snowball (linear)Accuracy80.96Unverified
Cora (3%)Snowball (tanh)Accuracy80.72Unverified
Cora (3%)Snowball (linear + tanh)Accuracy79.52Unverified
Cora with Public Split: fixed 20 nodes per classTruncated KrylovAccuracy83.16Unverified
Cora with Public Split: fixed 20 nodes per classSnowball (linear)Accuracy83.26Unverified
Cora with Public Split: fixed 20 nodes per classSnowball (tanh)Accuracy83.19Unverified
PubMed (0.03%)Snowball (linear + tanh)Accuracy61.94Unverified
PubMed (0.03%)Truncated KrylovAccuracy71.11Unverified
PubMed (0.03%)Snowball (linear)Accuracy68.12Unverified
PubMed (0.03%)Snowball (tanh)Accuracy62.61Unverified
PubMed (0.05%)Snowball (linear)Accuracy70.04Unverified
PubMed (0.05%)Truncated KrylovAccuracy72.57Unverified
PubMed (0.05%)Snowball (tanh)Accuracy68.99Unverified
PubMed (0.05%)Snowball (linear + tanh)Accuracy69.45Unverified
PubMed (0.1%)Snowball (linear)Accuracy73.83Unverified
PubMed (0.1%)Snowball (tanh)Accuracy74.4Unverified
PubMed (0.1%)Snowball (linear + tanh)Accuracy75.3Unverified
PubMed (0.1%)Truncated KrylovAccuracy77.21Unverified
PubMed with Public Split: fixed 20 nodes per classTruncated KrylovAccuracy81.7Unverified
PubMed with Public Split: fixed 20 nodes per classSnowball (tanh)Accuracy79.16Unverified
PubMed with Public Split: fixed 20 nodes per classSnowball (linear)Accuracy79.1Unverified

Reproductions