Skip to main content

Why Deeper Graph Neural Network Performs Worse? Discussion and Improvement About Deep GNNs

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
Artificial Neural Networks and Machine Learning – ICANN 2022 (ICANN 2022)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNCS,volume 13530))

Included in the following conference series:

Abstract

Many types of data can be represented by graphs consisting of nodes with features. The analysis of these graphs is facilitated by representing nodes as vectors, such that neighboring nodes and nodes with similar features have representations that are in close proximity in the vector space. Graph neural networks (GNNs) have been developed to learn such representations automatically, but their disadvantage is that the aggregation distance, which determines how many other nodes are considered relevant to each node, is fixed by the number of layers in the GNN. If the aggregation distance is too large, over-smoothing can result. This paper proposes TwinGNN for learning high-quality representations of nodes. Instead of using a fixed distance for the entire graph, TwinGNN learns the suitable distance for each node. We evaluated TwinGNN experimentally with several benchmark graph datasets. The results showed that TwinGNN successfully avoided over-smoothing. Its performance did not deteriorate as the number of GNN layers increased. Moreover, it performed better than the existing GNNs on almost all datasets.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    In this paper, we address the binary classification of nodes, although the proposed method can be extended to multi-class node classification, multi-label node classification, and graph classification.

  2. 2.

    https://github.com/yururyuru00/TwinNet.

References

  1. Fortunato, S.: Community detection in graphs. Phys. Rep. 486(3–5), 75–174 (2010)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  2. Kipf, T.N., Welling, M.: Semi-Supervised Classification with Graph Convolutional Networks. arXiv preprint arXiv:1609.02907 (2016)

  3. Veličković, P., et al.: Graph Attention Networks. arXiv preprint, arXiv:1710.10903 (2017)

  4. Hamilton, W.L., et al.: Inductive representation learning on large graphs. In: Proceedings of Int’l Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems, pp. 1025–1035 (2017)

    Google Scholar 

  5. Xu, K., et al.; How Powerful are Graph Neural Networks? arXiv preprint, arXiv:1810.00826 (2018)

  6. Li, G., et al.: Deepergcn: All You Need to Train Deeper GCNs. arXiv preprint, arXiv:2006.07739 (2020)

  7. He, K., et al.: Deep Residual Learning for Image Recognition. In: Proceedings of the IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, pp. 770–778 (2016)

    Google Scholar 

  8. Huang, G., et al.: Densely connected convolutional networks. In: Proceedings of the IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, pp. 4700–4708 (2017)

    Google Scholar 

  9. Veit, A., et al.: Residual Networks Behave like Ensembles of Relatively Shallow Networks. Adv. Neural. Inf. Process. Syst. 29, 550–558 (2016)

    Google Scholar 

  10. Bromley, J., et al.: Signature Verification using a "Siamese" Time Delay Neural Network. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, 6 (1993)

    Google Scholar 

  11. Yost, G.P.: Lectures on Probability and Statistics (1985)

    Google Scholar 

  12. Xu, K., et al.: Representation learning on graphs with jumping knowledge networks. In: International Conference on Machine Learning, pp. 5453–5462. PMLR (2018)

    Google Scholar 

  13. Levie, R., et al.: Cayleynets: graph convolutional neural networks with complex rational spectral filters. IEEE Trans. Signal Process. 67(1), 97–109 (2018)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  14. Hu, W., et al.: Open Graph Benchmark: Datasets for Machine Learning on Graphs. arXiv preprint, arXiv:2005.00687 (2020)

  15. Pei, H., et al.: Geom-gcn: Geometric Graph Convolutional Networks. arXiv preprint, arXiv:2002.05287 (2020)

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Yuta Yajima .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2022 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this paper

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this paper

Yajima, Y., Inokuchi, A. (2022). Why Deeper Graph Neural Network Performs Worse? Discussion and Improvement About Deep GNNs. In: Pimenidis, E., Angelov, P., Jayne, C., Papaleonidas, A., Aydin, M. (eds) Artificial Neural Networks and Machine Learning – ICANN 2022. ICANN 2022. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 13530. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-15931-2_60

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-15931-2_60

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-031-15930-5

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-031-15931-2

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics