Task-Oriented GNNs Training on Large Knowledge Graphs for Accurate and Efficient Modeling
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A Knowledge Graph (KG) is a heterogeneous graph encompassing a diverse range of node and edge types. Heterogeneous Graph Neural Networks (HGNNs) are popular for training machine learning tasks like node classification and link prediction on KGs. However, HGNN methods exhibit excessive complexity influenced by the KG's size, density, and the number of node and edge types. AI practitioners handcraft a subgraph of a KG$G$relevant to a specific task. We refer to this subgraph as a task-oriented subgraph (TOSG), which contains a subset of task-related node and edge types in$G$. Training the task using TOSG instead of$G$alleviates the excessive computation required for a large KG. Crafting the TOSG demands a deep understanding of the KG's structure and the task's objectives. Hence, it is challenging and time-consuming. This paper proposes KG-TOSA, an approach to automate the TOSG extraction for task-oriented HGNN training on a large KG. In KG-TOSA, we define a generic graph pattern that captures the KG's local and global structure relevant to a specific task. We explore different techniques to extract subgraphs matching our graph pattern: namely (i) two techniques sampling around targeted nodes using biased random walk or influence scores, and (ii) a SPARQL-based extraction method leveraging RDF engines' built-in indices. Hence, it achieves negligible preprocessing overhead compared to the sampling techniques. We develop a benchmark of real KGs of large sizes and various tasks for node classification and link prediction. Our experiments show that KG-TOSA helps state-of-the-art HGNN methods reduce training time and memory usage by up to 70% while improving the model performance, e.g., accuracy and inference time.
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 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| 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".