GBGC: Efficient and Adaptive Graph Coarsening via Granular-ball Computing
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The objective of graph coarsening is to generate smaller, more manageable graphs while preserving key information of the original graph. Previous work were mainly based on the perspective of spectrum-preserving, using some predefined coarsening rules to make the eigenvalues of the Laplacian matrix of the original graph and the coarsened graph match as much as possible. However, they largely overlooked the fact that the original graph is composed of subregions at different levels of granularity, where highly connected and similar nodes should be more inclined to be aggregated together as nodes in the coarsened graph. By combining the multi-granularity characteristics of the graph structure, we can generate coarsened graph at the optimal granularity. To this end, inspired by the application of granular-ball computing in multi-granularity, we propose a new multi-granularity, efficient, and adaptive coarsening method via granular-ball (GBGC), which significantly improves the coarsening results and efficiency. Specifically, GBGC introduces an adaptive granular-ball graph refinement mechanism, which adaptively splits the original graph from coarse to fine into granular-balls of different sizes and optimal granularity, and constructs the coarsened graph using these granular-balls as supernodes. In addition, compared with other state-of-the-art graph coarsening methods, the processing speed of this method can be increased by tens to hundreds of times and has lower time complexity. The accuracy of GBGC is almost always higher than that of the original graph due to the good robustness and generalization of the granular-ball computing, so it has the potential to become a standard graph data preprocessing method.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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 it