Efficient Distributed Exact Subgraph Matching via GNN-PE: Load Balancing, Cache Optimization, and Query Plan Ranking
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Exact subgraph matching on large-scale graphs remains a challenging problem due to high computational complexity and distributed system constraints. Existing GNN-based path embedding (GNN-PE) frameworks achieve efficient exact matching on single machines but lack scalability and optimization for distributed environments. To address this gap, we propose three core innovations to extend GNN-PE to distributed systems: (1) a lightweight dynamic correlation-aware load balancing and hot migration mechanism that fuses multi-dimensional metrics (CPU, communication, memory) and guarantees index consistency; (2) an online incremental learning-based multi-GPU collaborative dynamic caching strategy with heterogeneous GPU adaptation and graph-structure-aware replacement; (3) a query plan ranking method driven by dominance embedding pruning potential (PE-score) that optimizes execution order. Through METIS partitioning, parallel offline preprocessing, and lightweight metadata management, our approach achieves "minimum edge cut + load balancing + non-interruptible queries" in distributed scenarios (tens of machines), significantly improving the efficiency and stability of distributed subgraph matching.
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 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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 | 0.002 |
| 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".