Table of Contents
Fetching ...

Overcoming Oversmoothness in Graph Convolutional Networks via Hybrid Scattering Networks

Frederik Wenkel, Yimeng Min, Matthew Hirn, Michael Perlmutter, Guy Wolf

TL;DR

A hybrid GNN framework that combines traditional GCN-style networks with band-pass filters withBand-pass defined via geometric scattering is proposed and an attention framework is introduced that allows the model to locally attend over combined information from different nodes at the node level.

Abstract

Geometric deep learning has made great strides towards generalizing the design of structure-aware neural networks from traditional domains to non-Euclidean ones, giving rise to graph neural networks (GNN) that can be applied to graph-structured data arising in, e.g., social networks, biochemistry, and material science. Graph convolutional networks (GCNs) in particular, inspired by their Euclidean counterparts, have been successful in processing graph data by extracting structure-aware features. However, current GNN models are often constrained by various phenomena that limit their expressive power and ability to generalize to more complex graph datasets. Most models essentially rely on low-pass filtering of graph signals via local averaging operations, leading to oversmoothing. Moreover, to avoid severe oversmoothing, most popular GCN-style networks tend to be shallow, with narrow receptive fields, leading to underreaching. Here, we propose a hybrid GNN framework that combines traditional GCN filters with band-pass filters defined via geometric scattering. We further introduce an attention framework that allows the model to locally attend over combined information from different filters at the node level. Our theoretical results establish the complementary benefits of the scattering filters to leverage structural information from the graph, while our experiments show the benefits of our method on various learning tasks.

Overcoming Oversmoothness in Graph Convolutional Networks via Hybrid Scattering Networks

TL;DR

A hybrid GNN framework that combines traditional GCN-style networks with band-pass filters withBand-pass defined via geometric scattering is proposed and an attention framework is introduced that allows the model to locally attend over combined information from different nodes at the node level.

Abstract

Geometric deep learning has made great strides towards generalizing the design of structure-aware neural networks from traditional domains to non-Euclidean ones, giving rise to graph neural networks (GNN) that can be applied to graph-structured data arising in, e.g., social networks, biochemistry, and material science. Graph convolutional networks (GCNs) in particular, inspired by their Euclidean counterparts, have been successful in processing graph data by extracting structure-aware features. However, current GNN models are often constrained by various phenomena that limit their expressive power and ability to generalize to more complex graph datasets. Most models essentially rely on low-pass filtering of graph signals via local averaging operations, leading to oversmoothing. Moreover, to avoid severe oversmoothing, most popular GCN-style networks tend to be shallow, with narrow receptive fields, leading to underreaching. Here, we propose a hybrid GNN framework that combines traditional GCN filters with band-pass filters defined via geometric scattering. We further introduce an attention framework that allows the model to locally attend over combined information from different filters at the node level. Our theoretical results establish the complementary benefits of the scattering filters to leverage structural information from the graph, while our experiments show the benefits of our method on various learning tasks.
Paper Structure (25 sections, 5 theorems, 55 equations, 6 figures, 10 tables)

This paper contains 25 sections, 5 theorems, 55 equations, 6 figures, 10 tables.

Key Result

Proposition 1

The wavelet filter bank $\mathcal{W}= \{\operatorname{\boldsymbol{\Psi}}_k, \operatorname{\boldsymbol{\Phi}}_K\}_{k=0}^K$ introduced in Eq. eqn: W is a non-expansive frame with respect to the weighted norm defined by $\|\operatorname{\boldsymbol{x}}\|_{\operatorname{\boldsymbol{D}}^{-1/2}}\coloneqq

Figures (6)

  • Figure 1: Illustration of two-layer geom. scattering at the node level ($\boldsymbol{U}(\boldsymbol{x}) = \{\boldsymbol{U}_p \boldsymbol{x} : p \in \mathbb{N}_0^{m}, m = 0,1,2\}$) and at the graph level ($\boldsymbol{S}(\boldsymbol{x}) = \{\boldsymbol{S}_{p,q} \boldsymbol{x} : q \in \mathbb{N}, p \in \mathbb{N}_0^{m}, m = 0,1,2\}$), extracted according to the wavelet cascade in Eq. \ref{['eq:wavelet']}-\ref{['eq:scat-graph']}.
  • Figure 2: (a) & (b) comparison between GCN and our Sc-GCN: we add band-pass channels to collect different frequency components; (c) graph residual convolution layer; (d) Sc-GCN combines five network channels, followed by a graph residual convolution.
  • Figure 3: Illustration of the proposed scattering attention layer.
  • Figure 4: Intrinsic node features for two graphs (top/bottom). We compare nodes from the isomorphic horizontal path that is part of both graphs. Color coding indicates different node feature values and differs in (c). Node features are one-intrinsic (degrees) in (a) and (b), and two-intrinsic (average degree in one-step neighborhoods) in (c). Gray area represents subgraph used for the feature assignment at the indicated node.
  • Figure 5: Impact of training set size (top) and training time (bottom) on classification accuracy and error (correspondingly); training size measured relative to the original training size of each dataset; training time and validation error plotted in logarithmic scale; runtime measured for all methods on the same hardware, using original implementations accompanying their publications.
  • ...and 1 more figures

Theorems & Definitions (21)

  • Definition 1: Aggregate-Combine GNN
  • Proposition 1: Proposition 2.2 of perlmutter2019understanding
  • Definition 2: Intrinsic Node Features
  • Theorem 1
  • Definition 3: Structural Difference
  • Definition 4: No Coincidental Correspondence
  • Theorem 2
  • Remark 1
  • Remark 2
  • Lemma 1
  • ...and 11 more