Diversified Node Sampling based Hierarchical Transformer Pooling for Graph Representation Learning
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Graph pooling methods have been widely used on downsampling graphs, achieving impressive results on multiple graph-level tasks like graph classification and graph generation. An important line called node dropping pooling aims at exploiting learnable scoring functions to drop nodes with comparatively lower significance scores. However, existing node dropping methods suffer from two limitations: (1) for each pooled node, these models struggle to capture long-range dependencies since they mainly take GNNs as the backbones; (2) pooling only the highest-scoring nodes tends to preserve similar nodes, thus discarding the affluent information of low-scoring nodes. To address these issues, we propose a Graph Transformer Pooling method termed GTPool, which introduces Transformer to node dropping pooling to efficiently capture long-range pairwise interactions and meanwhile sample nodes diversely. Specifically, we design a scoring module based on the self-attention mechanism that takes both global context and local context into consideration, measuring the importance of nodes more comprehensively. GTPool further utilizes a diversified sampling method named Roulette Wheel Sampling (RWS) that is able to flexibly preserve nodes across different scoring intervals instead of only higher scoring nodes. In this way, GTPool could effectively obtain long-range information and select more representative nodes. Extensive experiments on 11 benchmark datasets demonstrate the superiority of GTPool over existing popular graph pooling methods.
Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 21 of its 36 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 31 Oct 2023.
Builds on
21 of 36 references.
References · 21
- 2017Attention Is All You Needcited by 60,361
- 2016Semi-Supervised Classification with Graph Convolutional Networkscited by 11,361
- 2017Graph Attention Networkscited by 8,923
- 2017Inductive Representation Learning on Large Graphscited by 6,320
- 2018How Powerful are Graph Neural Networks?cited by 4,393
- 2019Fast Graph Representation Learning with PyTorch Geometriccited by 2,434
- 2020Open Graph Benchmark: Datasets for Machine Learning on Graphscited by 2,163
- 2016Convolutional Neural Networks on Graphs with Fast Localized Spectral Filteringcited by 2,089
- 2013Spectral Networks and Locally Connected Networks on Graphscited by 1,102
- 2018Predict then Propagate: Graph Neural Networks meet Personalized PageRankcited by 993
- 2020Simple and Deep Graph Convolutional Networkscited by 860
- 2020TUDataset: A collection of benchmark datasets for learning with graphscited by 728
9 more
- 2020On the Bottleneck of Graph Neural Networks and its Practical Implicationscited by 631
- 2019Graph U-Netscited by 492
- 2019Self-Attention Graph Poolingcited by 421
- 2021Do Transformers Really Perform Bad for Graph Representation?cited by 320
- 2019A Fair Comparison of Graph Neural Networks for Graph Classificationcited by 244
- 2015Order Matters: Sequence to sequence for setscited by 237
- 2021Accurate Learning of Graph Representations with Graph Multiset Poolingcited by 120
- 2019Learnable Pooling in Graph Convolution Networks for Brain Surface Analysiscited by 11
- 2019Haar Graph Poolingcited by 4
Built on by
Not cited yet.