REVIEW 2 cited by
Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.
This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.
SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event
T0 review · schema-true
One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.
pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp
Grain: Improving Data Efficiency of Graph Neural Networks via Diversified Influence Maximization
read the original abstract
Data selection methods, such as active learning and core-set selection, are useful tools for improving the data efficiency of deep learning models on large-scale datasets. However, recent deep learning models have moved forward from independent and identically distributed data to graph-structured data, such as social networks, e-commerce user-item graphs, and knowledge graphs. This evolution has led to the emergence of Graph Neural Networks (GNNs) that go beyond the models existing data selection methods are designed for. Therefore, we present Grain, an efficient framework that opens up a new perspective through connecting data selection in GNNs with social influence maximization. By exploiting the common patterns of GNNs, Grain introduces a novel feature propagation concept, a diversified influence maximization objective with novel influence and diversity functions, and a greedy algorithm with an approximation guarantee into a unified framework. Empirical studies on public datasets demonstrate that Grain significantly improves both the performance and efficiency of data selection (including active learning and core-set selection) for GNNs. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first attempt to bridge two largely parallel threads of research, data selection, and social influence maximization, in the setting of GNNs, paving new ways for improving data efficiency.
Forward citations
Cited by 2 Pith papers
-
Real vs. Semi-Simulated: Rethinking Evaluation for Treatment Effect Estimation
Counterfactual metrics on semi-simulated benchmarks fail to identify the treatment effect estimators preferred by observable metrics on real datasets, with simple meta-learners outperforming specialized causal models.
-
Real vs. Semi-Simulated: Rethinking Evaluation for Treatment Effect Estimation
Large-scale study finds that counterfactual metrics on semi-simulated data do not select the same estimators as observable metrics on real data, and benchmark rankings fail to transfer.
discussion (0)
Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.