GBGC: Efficient and Adaptive Graph Coarsening via Granular-ball Computing
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.
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 | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".