Select and Calibrate the Low-confidence: Dual-Channel Consistency based Graph Convolutional Networks

The Graph Convolutional Networks (GCNs) have achieved excellent results in node classification tasks, but the model's performance at low label rates is still unsatisfactory. Previous studies in Semi-Supervised Learning (SSL) for graph have focused on using network predictions to generate soft pseudo-labels or instructing message propagation, which inevitably contains the incorrect prediction due to the over-confident in the predictions. Our proposed Dual-Channel Consistency based Graph Convolutional Networks (DCC-GCN) uses dual-channel to extract embeddings from node features and topological structures, and then achieves reliable low-confidence and high-confidence samples selection based on dual-channel consistency. We further confirmed that the low-confidence samples obtained based on dual-channel consistency were low in accuracy, constraining the model's performance. Unlike previous studies ignoring low-confidence samples, we calibrate the feature embeddings of the low-confidence samples by using the neighborhood's high-confidence samples. Our experiments have shown that the DCC-GCN can more accurately distinguish between low-confidence and high-confidence samples, and can also significantly improve the accuracy of low-confidence samples. We conducted extensive experiments on the benchmark datasets and demonstrated that DCC-GCN is significantly better than state-of-the-art baselines at different label rates.Comment: 25 pages, 7 figures. Submitted to neuco

A Survey on Deep Semi-supervised Learning

Deep semi-supervised learning is a fast-growing field with a range of practical applications. This paper provides a comprehensive survey on both fundamentals and recent advances in deep semi-supervised learning methods from model design perspectives and unsupervised loss functions. We first present a taxonomy for deep semi-supervised learning that categorizes existing methods, including deep generative methods, consistency regularization methods, graph-based methods, pseudo-labeling methods, and hybrid methods. Then we offer a detailed comparison of these methods in terms of the type of losses, contributions, and architecture differences. In addition to the past few years' progress, we further discuss some shortcomings of existing methods and provide some tentative heuristic solutions for solving these open problems.Comment: 24 pages, 6 figure