Papers › GDeR: Safeguarding Efficiency, Balancing, and Robustness via Prototypical Graph Pruning
GDeR: Safeguarding Efficiency, Balancing, and Robustness via Prototypical Graph Pruning
Guibin Zhang, Haonan Dong, Yuchen Zhang, ZHIXUN LI, Dingshuo Chen, Kai Wang, Tianlong Chen, Yuxuan Liang, Dawei Cheng, Kun Wang
Training high-quality deep models necessitates vast amounts of data, resulting in overwhelming computational and memory demands. Recently, data pruning, distillation, and coreset selection have been developed to streamline data volume by retaining, synthesizing, or selecting a small yet informative subset from the full set. Among these methods, data pruning incurs the least additional training cost and offers the most practical acceleration benefits. However, it is the most vulnerable, often suffering significant performance degradation with imbalanced or biased data schema, thus raising concerns about its accuracy and reliability in on-device deployment. Therefore, there is a looming need for a new data pruning paradigm that maintains the efficiency of previous practices while ensuring balance and robustness. Unlike the fields of computer vision and natural language processing, where mature solutions have been developed to address these issues, graph neural networks (GNNs) continue to struggle with increasingly large-scale, imbalanced, and noisy datasets, lacking a unified dataset pruning solution. To achieve this, we introduce a novel dynamic soft-pruning method, GDeR, designed to update the training ``basket'' during the process using trainable prototypes. GDeR first constructs a well-modeled graph embedding hypersphere and then samples \textit{representative, balanced, and unbiased subsets} from this embedding space, which achieves the goal we called Graph Training Debugging. Extensive experiments on five datasets across three GNN backbones, demonstrate that GDeR (I) achieves or surpasses the performance of the full dataset with 30%~50% fewer training samples, (II) attains up to a 2.81x lossless training speedup, and (III) outperforms state-of-the-art pruning methods in imbalanced training and noisy training scenarios by 0.3%~4.3% and 3.6%~7.8%, respectively.
In Syntology Open this paper in Syntology's Atlas, the map of the papers in Syntology's graph and their citations.
For agents, Syntology's MCP tool lists every function and class Syntology harvested from this paper and whether it ran (how to connect): get_harvested_code_for_paper(arxiv_id="2410.13761")
Code
Syntology Ran 12 of 18 code samples harvested from 1 repository linked to this paper; 6 have no recorded run. Of those that ran: 1 ran · honoured contract; 1 ran · our draft was wrong; 1 ran · fixture could not drive it; 9 ran with no contract checked.
By repository: official repository: 18 samples from 1 repository, 12 ran. The run record, sample by sample. “Ran” means executed on a synthesized input, not that the code is correct or reproduces the paper.
Repository list and official/mentioned flags are the archive's, frozen 2025-07-28. Reachability, where shown, is from one Syntology probe window (2026-09-16 to 2026-09-18); repositories not probed show nothing. GitHub stars are not tracked.
Code Syntology ran Syntology
18 samples harvested; 12 ran; 1 honoured the contract we drafted; 6 have no recorded run. Read from Syntology's graph 2026-09-24; that is when this build read the record, not when the samples ran.
Licence: 18 of the 18 samples are pointer only, meaning Syntology does not serve that copy's text. This page shows no code text for any sample; each one links to its file in the repository.
Harvested from ins1stenc3/gder. “Ran” means the sample executed on a synthesized input. It does not mean the output is correct, and nothing here reproduces the paper's results. “Honoured” and “violated” refer to a contract Syntology drafted from the code itself; “our draft was wrong” and “fixture could not drive it” are failures of Syntology's instrument, not of the code.
Each sample ends with its code_sha256, Syntology's identity for that exact code. An agent fetches the stored sample with Syntology's MCP tool get_code(code_sha256="…") (how to connect); click an identity to copy that call.
Repository labels, per sample. official repository: The archive marks this repository official for the paper. named in the paper: The archive records that the paper mentions this repository; it is not marked official. community (archive-listed): In the archive's code links for this paper, not marked official and not recorded as mentioned in the paper. found in paper text by Syntology: Syntology found this repository in the paper's own text; whether it is the authors' implementation is not asserted. community: Not in the archive's code links for this paper; a community repository Syntology harvested. Samples from a repository marked official are listed first. Licence labels name the repository's licence as recorded at harvest. “Pointer only” means Syntology does not serve that copy's text, for one of four reasons: no licence file was found; the licence was not identified; the licence is recorded as permissive but that copy's record is not marked cleared; or the licence is outside the permissive list Syntology serves text under (MIT, Apache-2.0, BSD and similar). Some licences outside that list permit redistribution, such as WTFPL, and GPL-3.0 under its conditions; they are simply not on the list. Hover a licence label for the reason. File links open the file on GitHub at the default branch, which may have changed since the harvest.
a5dc35fe4c7efb79 · report
b4bcdb22c9b59c72 · report
2c376b180b1f6d66 · report
8547f6c1add8e8a4 · report
21ab776f2134be13 · report
66f2460c9d8cbb27 · report
4d7ad1b248cb7a78 · report
61f4171a8dbc42b9 · report
27255bca73a351fc · report
df3a03386ba66e83 · report
fa6332edbe5967b0 · report
2ac6b4ffab6287ac · report
0070e900faada184 · report
66be83f4eb6906b4 · report
af686cb511289dbd · report
3f3985043f10a448 · report
09169577ef06a9bc · report
c9784c69b04f8033 · report
Tasks
Results from the paper archive 2025-07-28
No leaderboard rows for this paper in the archive.
Methods
Report a problem or propose a change · a person checks every report against the paper or source before anything changes; decisions are listed on /corrections