Stochastic Subgraph Neighborhood Pooling for Subgraph Classification
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Subgraph classification is an emerging field in graph representation learning where the task is to classify a group of nodes (i.e., a subgraph) within a graph (e.g., identifying rare diseases given a collection of phenotypes). Graph neural network (GNN) solutions for node, link, and graph tasks fail to perform well on subgraph classification as they do not capture the external topology of the subgraph (i.e., how the subgraph is located within the larger graph). The current state-of-the-art models address this shortcoming through either labeling tricks or multiple message-passing channels, which are computationally expensive and not scalable to large graphs. To address the scalability issue while maintaining generalization, we propose Stochastic Subgraph Neighborhood Pooling (SSNP), which jointly aggregates the subgraph and its neighborhood (i.e., external topology) information while removing the need for any computationally expensive operations (e.g. labeling tricks). Our extensive experiments demonstrate that SSNP outperforms or is comparable to state-of-the-art methods while being up to 13x faster in runtime.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".