The Value of Depth in Message Passing on Sparse Graphs: A Kesten-Stigum Dichotomy
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
How deep does a graph neural network need to be on a sparse graph? We study its purest statistical form: node classification on the sparse contextual stochastic block model (CSBM) with average degree Delta=O(1), whose local weak limit is a broadcast-labelled Poisson Galton-Watson tree. Prior work derived a message-passing classifier hℓ that aggregates from each vertex at distance k≤ℓ the attenuated evidence 2operatornameartanh(γk t(Xv)), with γ the edge signal and t a bounded likelihood-ratio transform of the feature. We prove that the value of depth is governed by a single number, the Kesten-Stigum ratio kappa=γ2Delta. Below the threshold (kappa<1), the error sequence is Cauchy at a geometric rate, |E(ℓ)-E(ℓ')|≤ Ckappa(ℓ+1)/3 for all ℓ'>ℓ, so all layers beyond depth O(log(1/ε)) change the error by less than ε; conversely, under mild regularity each sufficiently deep layer still flips the decision with probability at least ckappaℓ/2, the empirically sharp exponent. Above the threshold (kappa>1), depth is geometrically productive: E(ℓ) is driven to a branching-process floor of order at most 1/(kappa-1) at any geometric rate kappa-sℓ, s<1 (this bound has content only for kappa>17). No local classifier of any depth beats the universal floor e-DeltaPhi(-zeta) set by isolated roots (zeta the feature signal-to-noise ratio), while the first layer provably helps by an explicit total-variation amount. Simulations with an exact belief-propagation baseline on the same trees show that the pairwise rule's error curve is mildly non-monotone in ℓ, so an optimal finite depth exists (an exact instance is certified in the appendix), while BP saturates strictly faster, at an effective per-layer ratio below kappa that we identify.
Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 19 of its 37 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 18 Jul 2026.
Builds on
19 of 37 references.
References · 19
- 2016Semi-Supervised Classification with Graph Convolutional Networkscited by 11,361
- 2017Graph Attention Networkscited by 8,923
- 2018Deeper Insights into Graph Convolutional Networks for Semi-Supervised Learningcited by 1,102
- 2020On the Bottleneck of Graph Neural Networks and its Practical Implicationscited by 631
- 2017Community Detection and Stochastic Block Modelscited by 319
- 2019What graph neural networks cannot learn: depth vs widthcited by 201
- 2018Contextual Stochastic Block Modelscited by 134
- 2022Not too little, not too much: a theoretical analysis of graph (over)smoothingcited by 106
- 2021Graph Convolution for Semi-Supervised Classification: Improved Linear Separability and Out-of-Distribution Generalizationcited by 70
- 2013Spectral redemption: clustering sparse networkscited by 56
- 2022A Non-Asymptotic Analysis of Oversmoothing in Graph Neural Networkscited by 49
- 2013Community detection thresholds and the weak Ramanujan propertycited by 47
7 more
- 2013A Proof Of The Block Model Threshold Conjecturecited by 36
- 2022Graph Attention Retrospectivecited by 24
- 2022Effects of Graph Convolutions in Multi-layer Networkscited by 24
- 2020Contextual Stochastic Block Model: Sharp Thresholds and Contiguitycited by 22
- 2023Optimality of Message-Passing Architectures for Sparse Graphscited by 13
- 2014Global and Local Information in Clustering Labeled Block Modelscited by 5
- 2024Analysis of Corrected Graph Convolutionscited by 2
Built on by
Not cited yet.