Many computer vision and machine learning problems are modelled as learning tasks on graphs where graph neural networks GNNs have emerged as a dominant tool for learning representations of graph structured data A key feature of GNNs is their use of graph structures as input enabling them to exploit the graphs inherent topological properties known as the topology awareness of GNNs Despite the empirical successes of GNNs the influence of topology awareness on generalization performance remains unexplored, particularly for node level tasks that diverge from the assumption of data being independent and identically distributed IID The precise definition and characterization of the topology awareness of GNNs especially concerning different topological features are still unclear This paper introduces a comprehensive framework to characterize the topology awareness of GNNs across any topological feature Using this framework we investigate the effects of topology awareness on GNN generalization performance Contrary to the prevailing belief that enhancing the topology awareness of GNNs is always advantageous our analysis reveals a critical insight improving the topology awareness of GNNs may inadvertently lead to unfair generalization across structural groups which might not be desired in some scenarios Additionally we conduct a case study using the intrinsic graph metric the shortest path distance on various benchmark datasets The empirical results of this case study confirm our theoretical insights Moreover we demonstrate the practical applicability of our framework by using it to tackle the cold start problem in graph active learning
The fusion of causal models with deep learning introducing increasingly intricate data sets, such as the causal associations within images or between textual components, has surfaced as a focal research area. Nonetheless, the broadening of original causal concepts and theories to such complex, non-statistical data has been met with serious challenges. In response, our study proposes redefinitions of causal data into three distinct categories from the standpoint of causal structure and representation: definite data, semi-definite data, and indefinite data. Definite data chiefly pertains to statistical data used in conventional causal scenarios, while semi-definite data refers to a spectrum of data formats germane to deep learning, including time-series, images, text, and others. Indefinite data is an emergent research sphere inferred from the progression of data forms by us. To comprehensively present these three data paradigms, we elaborate on their formal definitions, differences manifested in datasets, resolution pathways, and development of research. We summarize key tasks and achievements pertaining to definite and semi-definite data from myriad research undertakings, present a roadmap for indefinite data, beginning with its current research conundrums. Lastly, we classify and scrutinize the key datasets presently utilized within these three paradigms.
Graph neural networks (GNNs) are effective machine learning models for many graph-related applications. Despite their empirical success, many research efforts focus on the theoretical limitations of GNNs, i.e., the GNNs expressive power. Early works in this domain mainly focus on studying the graph isomorphism recognition ability of GNNs, and recent works try to leverage the properties such as subgraph counting and connectivity learning to characterize the expressive power of GNNs, which are more practical and closer to real-world. However, no survey papers and open-source repositories comprehensively summarize and discuss models in this important direction. To fill the gap, we conduct a first survey for models for enhancing expressive power under different forms of definition. Concretely, the models are reviewed based on three categories, i.e., Graph feature enhancement, Graph topology enhancement, and GNNs architecture enhancement.
Graph neural networks (GNNs) have been demonstrated to be a powerful algorithmic model in broad application fields for their effectiveness in learning over graphs. To scale GNN training up for large-scale and ever-growing graphs, the most promising solution is distributed training which distributes the workload of training across multiple computing nodes. However, the workflows, computational patterns, communication patterns, and optimization techniques of distributed GNN training remain preliminarily understood. In this paper, we provide a comprehensive survey of distributed GNN training by investigating various optimization techniques used in distributed GNN training. First, distributed GNN training is classified into several categories according to their workflows. In addition, their computational patterns and communication patterns, as well as the optimization techniques proposed by recent work are introduced. Second, the software frameworks and hardware platforms of distributed GNN training are also introduced for a deeper understanding. Third, distributed GNN training is compared with distributed training of deep neural networks, emphasizing the uniqueness of distributed GNN training. Finally, interesting issues and opportunities in this field are discussed.
Recently, graph neural networks have been gaining a lot of attention to simulate dynamical systems due to their inductive nature leading to zero-shot generalizability. Similarly, physics-informed inductive biases in deep-learning frameworks have been shown to give superior performance in learning the dynamics of physical systems. There is a growing volume of literature that attempts to combine these two approaches. Here, we evaluate the performance of thirteen different graph neural networks, namely, Hamiltonian and Lagrangian graph neural networks, graph neural ODE, and their variants with explicit constraints and different architectures. We briefly explain the theoretical formulation highlighting the similarities and differences in the inductive biases and graph architecture of these systems. We evaluate these models on spring, pendulum, gravitational, and 3D deformable solid systems to compare the performance in terms of rollout error, conserved quantities such as energy and momentum, and generalizability to unseen system sizes. Our study demonstrates that GNNs with additional inductive biases, such as explicit constraints and decoupling of kinetic and potential energies, exhibit significantly enhanced performance. Further, all the physics-informed GNNs exhibit zero-shot generalizability to system sizes an order of magnitude larger than the training system, thus providing a promising route to simulate large-scale realistic systems.
The generalization mystery in deep learning is the following: Why do over-parameterized neural networks trained with gradient descent (GD) generalize well on real datasets even though they are capable of fitting random datasets of comparable size? Furthermore, from among all solutions that fit the training data, how does GD find one that generalizes well (when such a well-generalizing solution exists)? We argue that the answer to both questions lies in the interaction of the gradients of different examples during training. Intuitively, if the per-example gradients are well-aligned, that is, if they are coherent, then one may expect GD to be (algorithmically) stable, and hence generalize well. We formalize this argument with an easy to compute and interpretable metric for coherence, and show that the metric takes on very different values on real and random datasets for several common vision networks. The theory also explains a number of other phenomena in deep learning, such as why some examples are reliably learned earlier than others, why early stopping works, and why it is possible to learn from noisy labels. Moreover, since the theory provides a causal explanation of how GD finds a well-generalizing solution when one exists, it motivates a class of simple modifications to GD that attenuate memorization and improve generalization. Generalization in deep learning is an extremely broad phenomenon, and therefore, it requires an equally general explanation. We conclude with a survey of alternative lines of attack on this problem, and argue that the proposed approach is the most viable one on this basis.
Graph neural networks generalize conventional neural networks to graph-structured data and have received widespread attention due to their impressive representation ability. In spite of the remarkable achievements, the performance of Euclidean models in graph-related learning is still bounded and limited by the representation ability of Euclidean geometry, especially for datasets with highly non-Euclidean latent anatomy. Recently, hyperbolic space has gained increasing popularity in processing graph data with tree-like structure and power-law distribution, owing to its exponential growth property. In this survey, we comprehensively revisit the technical details of the current hyperbolic graph neural networks, unifying them into a general framework and summarizing the variants of each component. More importantly, we present various HGNN-related applications. Last, we also identify several challenges, which potentially serve as guidelines for further flourishing the achievements of graph learning in hyperbolic spaces.
Object detection is a fundamental task in computer vision and image processing. Current deep learning based object detectors have been highly successful with abundant labeled data. But in real life, it is not guaranteed that each object category has enough labeled samples for training. These large object detectors are easy to overfit when the training data is limited. Therefore, it is necessary to introduce few-shot learning and zero-shot learning into object detection, which can be named low-shot object detection together. Low-Shot Object Detection (LSOD) aims to detect objects from a few or even zero labeled data, which can be categorized into few-shot object detection (FSOD) and zero-shot object detection (ZSD), respectively. This paper conducts a comprehensive survey for deep learning based FSOD and ZSD. First, this survey classifies methods for FSOD and ZSD into different categories and discusses the pros and cons of them. Second, this survey reviews dataset settings and evaluation metrics for FSOD and ZSD, then analyzes the performance of different methods on these benchmarks. Finally, this survey discusses future challenges and promising directions for FSOD and ZSD.
Deep neural networks have revolutionized many machine learning tasks in power systems, ranging from pattern recognition to signal processing. The data in these tasks is typically represented in Euclidean domains. Nevertheless, there is an increasing number of applications in power systems, where data are collected from non-Euclidean domains and represented as the graph-structured data with high dimensional features and interdependency among nodes. The complexity of graph-structured data has brought significant challenges to the existing deep neural networks defined in Euclidean domains. Recently, many studies on extending deep neural networks for graph-structured data in power systems have emerged. In this paper, a comprehensive overview of graph neural networks (GNNs) in power systems is proposed. Specifically, several classical paradigms of GNNs structures (e.g., graph convolutional networks, graph recurrent neural networks, graph attention networks, graph generative networks, spatial-temporal graph convolutional networks, and hybrid forms of GNNs) are summarized, and key applications in power systems such as fault diagnosis, power prediction, power flow calculation, and data generation are reviewed in detail. Furthermore, main issues and some research trends about the applications of GNNs in power systems are discussed.
Deep neural networks (DNNs) are successful in many computer vision tasks. However, the most accurate DNNs require millions of parameters and operations, making them energy, computation and memory intensive. This impedes the deployment of large DNNs in low-power devices with limited compute resources. Recent research improves DNN models by reducing the memory requirement, energy consumption, and number of operations without significantly decreasing the accuracy. This paper surveys the progress of low-power deep learning and computer vision, specifically in regards to inference, and discusses the methods for compacting and accelerating DNN models. The techniques can be divided into four major categories: (1) parameter quantization and pruning, (2) compressed convolutional filters and matrix factorization, (3) network architecture search, and (4) knowledge distillation. We analyze the accuracy, advantages, disadvantages, and potential solutions to the problems with the techniques in each category. We also discuss new evaluation metrics as a guideline for future research.
Lots of learning tasks require dealing with graph data which contains rich relation information among elements. Modeling physics system, learning molecular fingerprints, predicting protein interface, and classifying diseases require that a model to learn from graph inputs. In other domains such as learning from non-structural data like texts and images, reasoning on extracted structures, like the dependency tree of sentences and the scene graph of images, is an important research topic which also needs graph reasoning models. Graph neural networks (GNNs) are connectionist models that capture the dependence of graphs via message passing between the nodes of graphs. Unlike standard neural networks, graph neural networks retain a state that can represent information from its neighborhood with an arbitrary depth. Although the primitive graph neural networks have been found difficult to train for a fixed point, recent advances in network architectures, optimization techniques, and parallel computation have enabled successful learning with them. In recent years, systems based on graph convolutional network (GCN) and gated graph neural network (GGNN) have demonstrated ground-breaking performance on many tasks mentioned above. In this survey, we provide a detailed review over existing graph neural network models, systematically categorize the applications, and propose four open problems for future research.