Over-Squashing in GNNs and Causal Inference of Rewiring Strategies
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Graph neural networks (GNNs) have exhibited state-of-the-art performance across wide-range of domains such as recommender systems, material design, and drug repurposing. Yet message-passing GNNs suffer from over-squashing -- exponential compression of long-range information from distant nodes -- which limits expressivity. Rewiring techniques can ease this bottleneck; but their practical impacts are unclear due to the lack of a direct empirical over-squashing metric. We propose a rigorous, topology-focused method for assessing over-squashing between node pairs using the decay rate of their mutual sensitivity. We then extend these pairwise assessments to four graph-level statistics (prevalence, intensity, variability, extremity). Coupling these metrics with a within-graph causal design, we quantify how rewiring strategies affect over-squashing on diverse graph- and node-classification benchmarks. Our extensive empirical analyses show that most graph classification datasets suffer from over-squashing (but to various extents), and rewiring effectively mitigates it -- though the degree of mitigation, and its translation into performance gains, varies by dataset and method. We also found that over-squashing is less notable in node classification datasets, where rewiring often increases over-squashing, and performance variations are uncorrelated with over-squashing changes. These findings suggest that rewiring is most beneficial when over-squashing is both substantial and corrected with restraint -- while overly aggressive rewiring, or rewiring applied to minimally over-squashed graphs, is unlikely to help and may even harm performance. Our plug-and-play diagnostic tool lets practitioners decide -- before any training -- whether rewiring is likely to pay off.
Key facts. Cited by 1 paper in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 22 of its 40 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 12 Aug 2025.
Builds on
22 of 40 references.
References · 22
- 2017Neural Message Passing for Quantum Chemistrycited by 3,487
- 2019Simplifying Graph Convolutional Networkscited by 1,477
- 2016Revisiting Semi-Supervised Learning with Graph Embeddingscited by 976
- 2018Representation Learning on Graphs with Jumping Knowledge Networkscited by 877
- 2020Geom-GCN: Geometric Graph Convolutional Networkscited by 826
- 2022Recipe for a General, Powerful, Scalable Graph Transformercited by 713
- 2019Multi-scale Attributed Node Embeddingcited by 548
- 2021Understanding over-squashing and bottlenecks on graphs via curvaturecited by 478
- 2019MixHop: Higher-Order Graph Convolutional Architectures via Sparsified Neighborhood Mixingcited by 443
- 2019Diffusion Improves Graph Learningcited by 414
- 2020SIGN: Scalable Inception Graph Neural Networkscited by 284
- 2021Weisfeiler and Lehman Go Topological: Message Passing Simplicial Networkscited by 221
10 more
- 2021Weisfeiler and Lehman Go Cellular: CW Networkscited by 218
- 2023On Over-Squashing in Message Passing Neural Networks: The Impact of Width, Depth, and Topologycited by 166
- 2022FoSR: First-order spectral rewiring for addressing oversquashing in GNNscited by 105
- 2023Understanding Oversquashing in GNNs through the Lens of Effective Resistancecited by 97
- 2023On the Connection Between MPNN and Graph Transformercited by 61
- 2019k-hop Graph Neural Networkscited by 57
- 2023Locality-Aware Graph-Rewiring in GNNscited by 56
- 2022Shortest Path Networks for Graph Property Predictioncited by 46
- 2023Simplifying Subgraph Representation Learning for Scalable Link Predictioncited by 7
- 2024Scalable Expressiveness through Preprocessed Graph Perturbationscited by 2
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2026: 1.
1 paper.