Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

The embedding propagation code seems to be not consistent with the paper #53

Open
Dousia opened this issue Jun 5, 2021 · 1 comment

Comments

@Dousia
Copy link

Dousia commented Jun 5, 2021

temp_embed = []
for f in range(self.n_fold):
temp_embed.append(tf.sparse_tensor_dense_matmul(A_fold_hat[f], ego_embeddings))
side_embeddings = tf.concat(temp_embed, 0)
sum_embeddings = tf.nn.leaky_relu(tf.matmul(side_embeddings, self.weights['W_gc_%d' % k]) + self.weights['b_gc_%d' % k])
bi_embeddings = tf.multiply(ego_embeddings, side_embeddings)
bi_embeddings = tf.nn.leaky_relu(tf.matmul(bi_embeddings, self.weights['W_bi_%d' % k]) + self.weights['b_bi_%d' % k])
ego_embeddings = sum_embeddings + bi_embeddings

In the code above, sum_embeddings and bi_embeddings are both calculated with side_embeddings (L*E). According to the paper, however, sum_embeddings are calculated with side_embeddings ((L+I)E) and bi_embeddings are calculated with another side_embeddings (L*E).

Could you please explain why?

@GuoshenLi
Copy link

I agree with you, and also I think the way they normalized the adj_matrix in the code (using mean) is not consistent with the D-1/2 A D-1/2.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants