Goto

Collaborating Authors

 node feature


Table

Neural Information Processing Systems

It also tolerates no prediction errors on the labeled nodes, so the trade-off parameter can be set to infinity. Local and Global Consistency (LGC) [82] relaxes the GRF method by eliminating the restriction of zero empirical risk on labeled nodes and exploits the normalized Laplacian matrix for smoothing instead. Random Walk Smoothing [83] extends LRC for directed graphs by indirectly operating LGC on a modified undirected graph with a new normalized Laplacian matrix L . Tikhonov Smoothing [4] only uses the labeled nodes in the quadratic error term. Hub & Authority Smoothing [84] proposes another random-walk-based strategy on directed graphs that is motivated by the hub and authority web model. Its smoothing matrix is more complex with two underlying Laplacian matrices LA,LH for in-links and out-links.


Zero-One Laws of Graph Neural Networks

Neural Information Processing Systems

Graph neural networks (GNNs) are the de facto standard deep learning architectures for machine learning on graphs. This has led to a large body of work analyzing the capabilities and limitations of these models, particularly pertaining to their representation and extrapolation capacity. We offer a novel theoretical perspective on the representation and extrapolation capacity of GNNs, by answering the question: how do GNNs behave as the number of graph nodes become very large? Under mild assumptions, we show that when we draw graphs of increasing size from the Erd os-Rรฉnyi model, the probability that such graphs are mapped to a particular output by a class of GNN classifiers tends to either zero or to one. This class includes the popular graph convolutional network architecture. The result establishes'zero-one laws' for these GNNs, and analogously to other convergence laws, entails theoretical limitations on their capacity. We empirically verify our results, observing that the theoretical asymptotic limits are evident already on relatively small graphs.



Checklist

Neural Information Processing Systems

A.1 Background on graph neural networks Many GNN architectures iteratively update node features following a neighborhood aggregation scheme.




NeuroGraph: Benchmarks for Graph Machine Learning in Brain Connectomics

Neural Information Processing Systems

Machine learning provides a valuable tool for analyzing high-dimensional functional neuroimaging data, and is proving effective in predicting various neurological conditions, psychiatric disorders, and cognitive patterns. In functional magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) research, interactions between brain regions are commonly modeled using graph-based representations. The potency of graph machine learning methods has been established across myriad domains, marking a transformative step in data interpretation and predictive modeling. Yet, despite their promise, the transposition of these techniques to the neuroimaging domain has been challenging due to the expansive number of potential preprocessing pipelines and the large parameter search space for graph-based dataset construction. In this paper, we introduce NeuroGraph1, a collection of graph-based neuroimaging datasets, and demonstrated its utility for predicting multiple categories of behavioral and cognitive traits.


Learning Conjoint Attentions for Graph Neural Nets

Neural Information Processing Systems

Besides considering the layer-wise node features propagated within the GNN, CAs can additionally incorporate various structural interventions, such as node cluster embedding, and higher-order structural correlations that can be learned outside of GNN, when computing attention scores. The node features that are regarded as significant by the conjoint criteria are therefore more likely to be propagated in the GNN. Given the novel Conjoint Attention strategies, we then propose Graph conjoint attention networks (CATs) that can learn representations embedded with significant latent features deemed by the Conjoint Attentions.