2025-04-02 lecture 17

[[lecture-data]]
Summary

3. Graphon Signal Processing

Question

Does the GFT converge to the WFT?

Question

And why do we care?

Answer

high variance of small samples might obscure important information in a signal's GFT, like the correlation with respect to the graph structure. Since the limiting graphon has no noise, it can reveal the "real"/intrinsic structure of the signal.

convergence of signals in the Fourier domain

Recall

first approach: using convergence of signal and eigenvalues

Conjecture 1

Given the two above, it is reasonable to conjecture that the GFT [x^n]i converges to the WFT [x^]i for all i.

Recall that

[x^n]i=xn,vinx^i=X,φi

In order to have convergence of the graph fourier transform to the graphon fourier transform, we need {1||convergence of the graph (filter) eigenvectors||convergence} to the {1||graphon (filter) eigenfunctions||to}

Theorem (Davis-Kahan)

Let T and T be self-adjoint Hilbert-Schmidt operators with eigenspectra (λi,,φi) and (λi,φi) respectively ordered by eigenvalue magnitude. Then

||φiφi||π2||TT||d(λi,λi)

Where |||| is the operator norm and d(λi,λi) is defined as

d(λi,λi)min(minji(|λiλj|),minji(|λjλi|))

Call the first interior min d1 and the second d2

Example

20250402-graph.png
d(λi,λi) corresponds to the minimum "eigengap" for the closes eigenvalue for eigenvalue λi in its own spectrum. Smallest

Note

If d(,) is large, then this is OK for fast convergence. But if this is small, then we also need small ||TT|| to get fast convergence.

see Davis-Kahan Theorem

Let {Gn,Xn}(W,X). We can use the Davis-Kahan Theorem with TW (the limiting graphon shift operator) and TWn (induced graphon shift operator).

||φ(TWn)φi(TW)||π2||TWTWn||d(λi(TW),λi(TWn))

This is good because from lecture 15, we know that if Gn converges to W in the cut norm, then TWn converges to TW in L2 (cut norm Convergence in the cut norm implies convergence in L2). Thus we have convergence in the numerator!

Does this mean everything is OK?

20250402-graph-1.png

Convergence holds in the sense that for all ϵ>0, there exists n0 such that for all n>n0,

|λi(Gn)nλi(W)|<ϵ

However, n0 will be different for each i/eigenvalue (non-uniform convergence! we cannot fix a common n0 for each ϵ)

Note

  • this is a limitation of graphons
  • for dense graphs this is useful
  • bounded spectrum
  • sparser graphs do not have convergence of spectra, so they are harder to deal with as well

Though the eigenvalues converge, they do not converge uniformly since their accumulation is at 0.

So conjecture 1 is wrong, but in the right direction

approach 2:

bandlimited graphon signal

A graphon signal (W,X) is c-bandlimited if its graphon fourier transform satisfies x^i=0 for all iC={j such that |λj|>c}

see bandlimited graphon signal

Example

"Limiting" the energy to a middle "band" of frequencies about 0
20250402-graph-2.png
20250402-graph-3.png

Conjecture 2 (revision of conjecture 1)

Let (W,X) be c-bandlimited and (Gn,Xn) a sequence converging to (W,X). Then the GFT (x^n)i converges to the WFT x^i

Theorem

Let (W,X) be c-bandlimited and (Gn,Xn) a sequence converging to (W,X). Then the GFT (x^n)i converges to the WFT x^i

Proof

Let C be the set of eigenvalues in the c-bandlimited set. Then for all iC, we have

|(x^n)ix^i|=|Xn,φi(n)X,φi|=|Xn,φi(n)+X,φi(n)X,φinX,φi|||XXn||||φi(n)||+||X||||φi(n)φi||

By convergence of Xn, for all ϵ>0, there exists some n1 such that ||XnX||ϵ2 for all n>n1.

And for ||φi(n)φi||, we have

||φi(n)φi||π2||TWTWn||d(λi,λi(n))π2||TWTWn||miniCd(λi,λi(n))

And from TWnTW, for all ϵ>0, there is some n2 such that ||φi(n)φi||ϵ2 for all n>n2

Thus, for any ϵ and each n>max{n1,n2} and for all iC, we have

|(x^n)ix^i|||XnX||||φi(n)||1+||X||||φi(n)φi||ϵ2+||X||ϵ2||X||=ϵ

And for iC,

φi(TWn),XnΨ,X=0

Where Ψ∈⊥span{φi:iC} (orthogonal complement)

see bandlimited convergent graph signals converge in the fourier domain

Graphon Convolutions

WFT is the {1||algebraic equivalent} of GFT; graphon filters have the same {1||algebraic structure} of graph filters. These are the same {2||shift-and-sum} operations, but now the {2||shift} is the graphon shift TW

Graphon convolution

Given a graphon signal (W,X), we write the graphon convolution as the map

TH:L2([0,1])L2([0,1])TH:XY

with

Y=THX=k=0K1hkTW(k)X

and

TW(k)X={01W(u,)(TW(k1)X)(u)duk1Ik=0

see graphon convolution

Like graph convolutions, graphon convolutions also have a spectral representation (see spectral representation of graphon convolutions)

Theorem

Given a graphon convolution with input graphon signal X and output Y, the WFTs X^ of Y^ are related as

Y^j=k=0K1hkλjkX^j=T^H(λj).X^j=h(λj)X^j

Where h(λj)=k=0K1hkλjk is our polynomial. Here, T^H acts pointwise on the graphon signal X

Proof

Y=k=0K1hkjZ{0}λjkφj(v)01φj(u)X(u)dux^j=k=0K1hkjZ{0}λjkφj(v)X^Y^i=01Y(u)φi(u)du=k=0K1hkλikφi2(u)du1x^iY^i=k=0K1hkλikx^i

This is a simple result following the diagonalization of TW(k) by φi

Note

Some interesting takeaways (analogues of the graph convolution)

  • Like the WFT, the spectral response of a graphon convolution is discrete
  • the spectral response of the graphon convolution is also pointwise in that the jth spectral component of the output Y only depends on λj and X^j
    • ie Y^j depends only on λj and X^j
  • The spectral response of TH given by h(λ)=k=0K1hkλk is independent of the underlying W (like the spectral response of H(S) was independent of the graph)
  • ie, the spectral response can be written as a polynomial function. The eigenvalues of the graphon determine where we evaluate this function. (samples of function that is eigenvalues/spectrum)
Example

20250402-graph-4.png

Important

Given the same (fixed) coefficients hk, define the graph convolution H(S)x=k=0K1hkSkx. The spectral representation of that convolution is h(λ)=k=0K1hkλk

Question

Why do we care?

Given a convergent graph sequence GnW, we know that

λi(Gn)nλi(W)i

And if we fix coefficients hk, the graph convolution H(S) and the graphon convolution TH have the same spectral response (from above)

h(λ)=k=0K1hkλk
Theorem

Given GnW and H(GN)=k=0K1hk(Ann)k and TH=k=0K1hkTW(k), we have

H^T^H

in the sense that

T^H(λj(TWn))T^H(λj(TW))jZ{0}

the graph convolution converges to the graphon convolution (with the same filter coefficients) in the spectral domain.

This says

  1. Convergence of the graph convolution to the graphon convolution in the spectral domain (first line)
  2. Convergence of the spectral response of the graphon convolution on the induced graphon converges pointwise to the spectral response of the limiting graphon convolution (second line)

see the graph convolution converges to the graphon convolution in the spectral domain for a convergent sequence of graph signals

And this holds for all eigenvalue indices j.

Problem though

Spectral convergence is not enough to do what we want. Graph convolutions operate in the node domain.

Review

#flashcards/math/dsg

We'd like to use the Davis-Kahan Theorem to bound the distance between the eigenfunctions of the induced graphon shift operator and the limiting graphon shift operator to show convergence in the Fourier domain. Why does this fail? (2 reasons)
-?-

  1. The denominator of the bound might vanish because λi0 as i (the distances are getting smaller and smaller)
  2. The eigenvalues only accumulate at 0. This means we have non-uniform convergence in the eigenvalues

{1||bandlimited||condition} convergent graph signals converge {2||in the fourier domain.||result}

Created 2025-04-02 Last Modified 2025-06-05