Prioritizing Potential Wetland Areas via Region-to-Region Knowledge Transfer and Adaptive Propagation
Extracted source text · arXiv 2406.05578
\documentclass[sigconf,natbib=true]{acmart}
\usepackage{amsmath,amsfonts}
\usepackage{adjustbox}
\usepackage{algorithm}
\usepackage[noend]{algpseudocode}
\usepackage{graphicx}
\usepackage{textcomp}
\usepackage{xcolor}
\usepackage{caption}
\usepackage{subcaption}
\usepackage{tabularx}
\usepackage{multirow}
\usepackage{makecell}
\usepackage{diagbox}
\usepackage{booktabs}
\usepackage{color, colortbl}
\usepackage{courier}
\usepackage{pifont}
\usepackage{enumitem}
\definecolor{Gray}{gray}{0.9}
\algrenewcommand\algorithmicrequire{\textbf{Input:}}
\algrenewcommand\algorithmicensure{\textbf{Output:}}
\sloppy
\newcommand{\from}[2]{\textcolor{red}{\bf [{\sc from #1:} #2]}}
\AtBeginDocument{
\providecommand\BibTeX{{
\normalfont B\kern-0.5em{\scshape i\kern-0.25em b}\kern-0.8em\TeX}}}
\setcopyright{acmcopyright}
\copyrightyear{2024}
\acmYear{2024}
\author{Yoonhyuk Choi, K. Sel\c{c}uk Candan, Huan Liu }
\orcid{0000-0003-4359-5596}
\affiliation{
\institution{
Arizona State University}
\city{Tempe}
\state{Arizona, USA}
}
\email{jim1995,candan,hliu@asu.edu}
\author{Reepal Shah, John Sabo}
\orcid{0000-0003-4359-5596}
\affiliation{
\institution{
Tulane University}
\city{New Orleans}
\state{Louisiana, USA}
}
\email{rshah3,jsabo1@tulane.edu}
\renewcommand{\shortauthors}{Yoonhyuk Choi et al.}
\newtheorem{theorem}{Theorem}%[section]
\newtheorem{manualtheoreminner}{\textbf{Theorem}}
\newenvironment{manualtheorem}[1]{%
\renewcommand\themanualtheoreminner{#1}%
\manualtheoreminner
}{\endmanualtheoreminner}
\newtheorem{manualproposition}{\textbf{Proposition}}
\newenvironment{manualprop}[1]{%
\renewcommand\themanualproposition{#1}%
\manualproposition
}{\endmanualproposition}
\acmConference[CIKM '24] {Proceedings of the 33rd ACM International Conference on Information and Knowledge Management}{October 21--25, 2024}{Boise, Idaho, USA}
\acmBooktitle{Proceedings of the 33rd ACM International Conference on Information and Knowledge Management (CIKM '24), October 21--25, 2024, Boise, Idaho, USA}
\acmPrice{15.00}
\acmISBN{978-1-4503-9236-5/22/10}
\acmDOI{10.1145/3511808.3557324}
\begin{document}
\title{Prioritizing Potential Wetland Areas via Region-to-Region Knowledge Transfer and Adaptive Propagation}
\begin{abstract}
Wetlands are important to communities, offering benefits ranging from water purification, and flood protection to recreation and tourism. Therefore, identifying and prioritizing potential wetland areas is a critical decision problem. While data-driven solutions are feasible, this is complicated by significant data sparsity due to the low proportion of wetlands (3-6\%) in many areas of interest in the southwestern US. This makes it hard to develop data-driven models that can help guide the identification of additional wetland areas. To solve this limitation, we propose two strategies: (1) The first of these is knowledge transfer from regions with rich wetlands (such as the Eastern US) to sparser regions (such as the Southwestern area with few wetlands). Recognizing that these regions are likely to be very different from each other in terms of soil characteristics, population distribution, and land use, we propose a domain disentanglement strategy that identifies and transfers only the applicable aspects of the learned model.
%
(2) We complement this with a spatial data enrichment strategy that relies on an adaptive propagation mechanism. This mechanism differentiates between node pairs that have positive and negative impacts on each other for Graph Neural Networks (GNNs).
%
To summarize, given two spatial cells belonging to different regions, we identify domain-specific and domain-shareable features, and, for each region, we rely on adaptive propagation to enrich features with the features of surrounding cells.
%
We conduct rigorous experiments to substantiate our proposed method's effectiveness, robustness, and scalability compared to state-of-the-art baselines. Additionally, an ablation study demonstrates that each module is essential in prioritizing potential wetlands, which justifies our assumption.
\end{abstract}
\begin{CCSXML}
<ccs2012>
<concept>
<concept_id>10002951.10003227.10003236.10003237</concept_id>
<concept_desc>Information systems~Geographic information systems</concept_desc>
<concept_significance>500</concept_significance>
</concept>
\end{CCSXML}
\ccsdesc[500]{Information systems~Information systems applications~Spatial-temporal systems~Geographic information systems}
\keywords{Recommender system, Wetland identification, Transfer learning, Domain disentanglement, Adaptive propagation, Data sparsity}
\maketitle
\begin{figure}[h]
\vspace{5mm}
\centering
%\fbox{\includegraphics[width=0.25\textwidth]{assets/nlcd_example.png}}
\includegraphics[width=0.43\textwidth]{assets/example.png}
\caption{Natural Land Cover Dataset (NLCD \cite{dewitz2021national} provides 20 categories of land use, including wetlands (types 90 and 95). The data reveals that only 6\% of the land in the US is wetland}
\label{fig:nlcd}
\end{figure}
\section{Introduction}
Wetlands, characterized by the presence of water at or near the surface of the soil for most of the year, play several crucial roles within an ecosystem. Specifically, they provide habitat for various plant and animal species, improving water quality by filtering pollutants and storing carbon that mitigates climate change \cite{lyon1993wetland}. Furthermore, wetlands are also important to communities for water purification and flood protection \cite{hammer2020wetlands}. Despite their value to the ecosystem, wetlands face challenges from competition with agriculture and urban development, as well as from climate change. These highlight the need for both the conservation of existing wetlands and the identification of potential new wetland areas\footnote{This research has been funded by
NSF$\#$2311716 and by the US Army Corps of Engineers Engineering With Nature Initiative through Cooperative Ecosystem Studies Unit Agreement $\#$W912HZ-21-2-0040}.
%\from{Jim}{Reepal can elaborate this paragraph}
\subsection{Challenges and Solutions}
%Due to these special characteristics, prioritizing potential wetlands in some areas is crucial for living. However,
A major challenge in developing new wetlands, particularly in areas where they are essential for water conservation, is the arid climate and local soil features that make water retention difficult. As shown in Figure \ref{fig:nlcd}, wetlands only account for 6\% of land cover in the US and the share of wetlands gets even lower if in dryer regions.
%
The sparsity of wetlands makes it hard to develop data-driven models that can help guide the identification of new wetland areas.
%
In particular, given the large imbalance between the wetland and non-wetland regions,
%Thus, using such highly imbalanced data may easily lead to overfitting issues with plane %algorithms.
naively developed models can suffer from overfitting and bias issues. This issue is further complicated considering that regions with few wetlands are not necessarily suitable for wetland development, making it particularly challenging to develop data-driven models with sparse positive samples.
In this paper, we argue that this {\em data sparsity} challenge can be addressed by relying on two complementary techniques:
\begin{itemize}[leftmargin=*]
\item {\em Region-to-region knowledge transfer:} As illustrated in Figure \ref{fig:kt}, we can transfer knowledge from regions with rich wetlands (such as the Eastern US) to regions where wetlands are sparse (such as the Southwestern US with few wetlands). However, this solution suffers from {\em {\bf global context incompatibility} challenge -- } since the source and target regions are likely to differ significantly in soil characteristics, population distribution, and land use. Moreover, the expected outcomes (water storage vs. flood prevention) from the wetlands make it difficult to transfer knowledge from the source context to the target.
\item {\em Adaptive knowledge transfer within local regions:} We complement this with a spatial data enrichment strategy that transfers useful information among the spatial cells, with different characteristics, in the same vicinity. This solution also encounters a form of {\em {\bf local context incompatibility,}} where information from nearby cells should be considered differently: while some cell pairs {\em positively} affect each other, others have a {\em negative} impact. Hence, it's crucial to identify and consider this aspect when implementing knowledge transfer between local regions.
\end{itemize}
We tackle the first of these challenges, namely global context incompatibility, through {\em domain disentanglement,} where we separate domain-specific information from information shareable across regions.
%Domain disentanglement is one of the techniques of transfer learning, which captures only the useful information from the richer data in the source domain to the sparse target domain. Specifically, we extract domain-shareable information based on the domain adaptation algorithm for knowledge transfer. For this, we employ one of the most recently proposed techniques, which forwards
More specifically, we leverage a domain discriminator-based approach which disentangles domain-specific and domain-shareable features more effectively than entropy-based approaches. %\from{selcuk}{In addition, we propose a novel domain separability constraint to improve the effectiveness of transfer learning. }
We tackle the second, local context incompatibility, challenge, by proposing an {\em adaptive propagation} technique that adjusts the weight of message-passing in a way that differentiates between node pairs that have positive and negative impacts.
%
Graph Neural Networks (GNNs), commonly used for local knowledge transfer, generally assume homophily, wherein connected (or adjacent) nodes are likely to share the same label.
%
However, this assumption is especially problematic where we have very few wetlands in a given region, and applying homophilic GNNs could significantly degrade performance by overwhelming information provided by these few wetlands with information from plentiful non-wetland regions.
%Recent studies have also found that as graph heterophily increases, the performance of plain GNNs significantly drops.
Therefore, we propose an adaptive propagation technique that appropriately adjusts information passed from neighboring nodes or uses information from further away nodes to prevent bias in local knowledge transfer.
\subsection{Contributions of this Paper}
In summary, we propose a novel method of identifying {\em \textbf{Po}tential wetlands via \textbf{T}ransfer learning and \textbf{A}daptive propagation (PoTA)}
to tackle the data sparsity challenge in wetland prioritization problem, which is equipped with two complementary knowledge transfer techniques:
\begin{itemize}
\item We suggest a long-range, region-to-region knowledge transfer from locations rich in wetlands to sparser ones using domain disentanglement
\item Coupled with adaptive feature propagation within individual regions, we employ an enhanced message-passing scheme between heterophilic neighbors.
\end{itemize}
We provide theoretical analyses of the effectiveness of the proposed components in solving data sparsity issues.
%
We further conduct experiments to test the empirical efficacy of our method considering six regions of the US, with sparse to moderate to dense wetland portfolios and varying soil and land use characteristics. Our empirical investigation includes ablation studies to explore the contributions of the various modules in solving this problem.
\begin{figure}[t]
\vspace{5mm}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.3\textwidth]{assets/k_transfer.pdf}
\caption{Knowledge transfer from wetland-rich areas of the US to regions where wetlands are inherently sparse}
\label{fig:kt}
\end{figure}
\section{Related Work}
\subsection{Wetland Identification}
Wetlands are known to occur due to reasons such as permanent inundation or soil saturation \cite{tiner1991concept}. Due to
the value of their resources, prioritizing potential wetlands has become an important topic \cite{lyon1993wetland}. Generally, the formation of wetlands is known to be closely related to soil characteristics \cite{faulkner1989field,megonigal1993wetland,mausbach1994classification,richardson2001wetland}. Therefore, various methods have been proposed for wetland identification, such as collecting geographic data based on sensing \cite{adam2010multispectral,mahdavi2018remote} or finding indicators \cite{tiner2016wetland} necessary for wetland formation. Based on these associations, the most recent approach presented is solving the problem using deep learning techniques on the physically-informed data \cite{o2020deep,greenhill2024machine}.
\subsection{Transfer Learning}
Knowledge transfer (a.k.a transfer learning) refers to using additional data (source domain) to solve data sparsity when training data is lacking in the target domain. Generally, this method utilizes the common contexts that exist in both domains, which is widely used in text classification \cite{do2005transfer}, digit recognition \cite{maitra2015cnn}, and recommender systems \cite{choi2022based}. The common context means some information like images, digits, ratings, and so on. In our case, the natural features like soil and drainage features from different regions could be used for transfer learning. Here, we focus on the cross-domain recommendation schemes \cite{man2017cross,wang2018cross, zhao2020catn,zhu2021cross}, which suggest capturing common knowledge from both domains. The foundational concept called domain adaptation \cite{yuan2019darec,bonab2021cross} has been proposed, which captures domain-shareable features (common knowledge) through adversarial training. However, several recent studies have revealed that the common features without specific guidance may not always be helpful to the target domain \cite{peng2019domain,li2019learning,nema2021disentangling}. This becomes more severe as the discrepancy between domains (e.g., different categories) increases, leading to the proposal of domain disentanglement techniques \cite{cai2019learning,cheng2020improving,cao2022disencdr,choi2024based} to address this issue.
\subsection{Adaptive Propagation}
Information propagation \cite{neumann2016propagation} is a widely used technique in graph theory. In detail, the mechanism of Graph Neural Networks (GNNs) is node embedding and message-passing (propagation) \cite{garcia2017learning}, which has the advantage of using the adjacent nodes for the prediction. However, message-passing algorithms may fail to perform well under heterophilic graphs \cite{pei2020geom}, where most edges connect two nodes with different labels. To conquer this problem, several studies suggested finding these connections \cite{huang2019signed,choi2022finding,zhao2023graph} by measuring the difference of nodes (e.g., attention) or by utilizing remote nodes with high similarity (non-local aggregation). In addition, \cite{zhu2020beyond} proposes ego-neighbor separation for message-passing, \cite{zhu2021graph} generates a compatibility matrix, \cite{li2022finding} further utilizes neighbors (non-local propagation), and \cite{ijcai2022p310} figures out the path-level pattern. As another branch, the mechanism of adaptive propagation \cite{wang2022powerfulb}, and choosing appropriate architectures \cite{zheng2023auto} have been recently proposed. The core concept of adaptive propagation is that they determine the sign of edges \cite{chien2020adaptive,bo2021beyond,fang2022polarized,guo2022clenshaw} before applying message-passing scheme, which can be either positive or negative.
\section{Preliminaries}
In this section, we present the preliminaries, including useful notations that will be employed throughout this paper.
We first introduce the natural features available for wetland prioritization. Then, we formulate the wetland prioritization problem.
\subsection{Land Cover and Surface Features} \label{data_source}
In this paper, we primarily rely on the Natural Land Cover Dataset (\textbf{NLCD 2021}\footnote{https://www.indianamap.org/maps/INMap::nlcd-land-cover-2021/about}) visualized in Figure \ref{fig:nlcd}.
The data set includes the land cover type (20 categories, at $30m\times 30m$ resolution)
%nine epochs
from 2001 to 2021.
This data set is complemented with soil type information, from
\textbf{SSURGO}\footnote{https://www.nrcs.usda.gov/resources/data-and-reports/gridded-soil-survey-geographic-gssurgo-database} data set, and drainage information from {\em Height Above the Nearest Drainage} \textbf{(HAND)} data set\footnote{https://registry.opendata.aws/glo-30-hand/}. The SSURGO feature consists of soil characteristics, slope gradient, water table depth, available water storage, and so on.
Note that these two data sets have different resolutions from the NLCD data set -- for instance, the SSURGO data set has a finer $10m\times 10m$ resolution. Therefore, we integrated the three data sets by downscaling their resolutions as appropriate. The final aligned data sets have $30m\times 30m$ resolution.
\begin{table}[t]\caption{Notations}
\vspace{-1.5em}
\small
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{@{}l|l@{}}
\toprule
\multicolumn{1}{c|}{\textbf{Symbol}} & \textbf{Explanation} \\
\toprule
\multicolumn{1}{c|}{$\mathcal{S},\mathcal{T}$} & Source and target domains\\
\multicolumn{1}{c|}{$\mathcal{G}$} & Adjacency graph of cells\\
\multicolumn{1}{c|}{$c$} & Specific cell\\
\multicolumn{1}{c|}{$w_e=c, \widehat{w}_c$} & True and predicted wetland label\\
\multicolumn{1}{c|}{$s_c$} & Multi-dimensional soil features \\
\multicolumn{1}{c|}{$h_c$} & Height above nearest drainage (binary)\\
\multicolumn{1}{c|}{$l_c$} & Extracted latent feature of $s_c,h_c$ \\
\multicolumn{1}{c|}{$d_c, \widehat{d}_c$} & True and predicted domain label of $f_c$\\
\multicolumn{1}{c|}{$N_s,N_t$} & Mini-batch training samples for $s$ and $t$ \\
\multicolumn{1}{c|}{$\oplus$} & Concatenation operator \\
\multicolumn{1}{c|}{$\mathcal{L}$} & Loss function \\
\bottomrule
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\label{tab:notations}
\end{table}
%\begin{figure}
% %\vspace{5mm}
% \centering
% \includegraphics[width=0.4\textwidth]{assets/nlcd_example.png}
% \caption{The Natural Land Cover Dataset (NLCD) contains the land use information of the entire territory of the United States. The meaning of each color can be found in Figure \ref{example}}
% \label{nlcd_example}
%\end{figure}
\subsection{Problem Formulation} \label{prob_for}
The wetland prioritization task can be formulated as follows. As mentioned above, for each target region ($R_\tau$), we have land cover (NLCD), soil (SSURGO), and drainage (HAND) data. Specifically, for each cell $c$ in the range, we have a wetland label $w_c \in \{0, 1\}$ (wetland if $w_c=1$), multi-dimensional soil feature vector $s_c$, and drainage flag value $h_c \in \{0, 1\}$.
%
Coupled with these, we further assume an adjacency matrix $\mathcal{G}_\tau,$ which describes the neighborhood relationship among the cells in the region. Given these, we define the {\em wetland classification} problem as follows:
%
\begin{definition}[Wetland Classification]
Given the set of tuples $D_\tau = \{ (c, \mathcal{G}_c, s_c, h_c)\;|\; c\in R_\tau\}$, the {\em wetland classification} problem aims to find a mapping function $f_\tau(c, \mathcal{G}_c, s_c, h_c) \rightarrow w_c$.
\end{definition}
The careful reader would note that the wetland classification problem, in and of itself, will not enable wetland identification and prioritization tasks as the only thing a perfect model with $100\%$ accuracy would provide is an explanation of the current wetlands in the given region, rather than recommending new wetlands. Therefore, we seek models with {\em high recalls} (i.e., accurately explaining existing wetlands in the region), while not necessarily having perfect precision. For instance, a cell $c$ in the target region $R_\tau$ where the model predicts a wetland, despite the absence of one currently, may serve as a candidate for new wetland development.
As discussed before, our goal is to improve the wetland identification and prioritization task for target regions with sparse wetlands by relying on information obtained from source regions with denser wetlands. Therefore, we present a slightly modified version of the problem as follows:
\begin{definition}[Wetland Classification with Knowledge Transfer]
Given a source region, $R_{s}$ and a target region $R_{\tau}$ and the associated sets of tuples $D_{s}$ and $D_{\tau}$, the {\em wetland classification with knowledge transfer} problem aims to find a mapping function $f_{s,\tau}(c, \mathcal{G}_c, s_c, h_c) \rightarrow w_c$, where $c \in R_\tau$.
\end{definition}
As before we seek models with {\em high recalls} for the target region. High precision is preferred, with the understanding that a cell $c \in R_\tau$ for which $w_c = 0$ and $f_{s,\tau}(c, \mathcal{G}_c, s_c, h_c) = 1$ may be a candidate for new wetland development.
%
Note that, while the classification problem has been defined considering those cells in the target region (i.e., $c \in R_\tau$), as a potential by-product of the process, the learned mapping function may be used to classify also the cells in the source region. The notations used throughout this paper are summarized in Table \ref{tab:notations}.
\begin{figure}[t]
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{assets/pota_overview.pdf}
\caption{Overview of the proposed {\em \textbf{Po}tential wetlands via \textbf{T}ransfer learning and \textbf{A}daptive propagation (PoTA)} }
\label{fig:model}
\end{figure}
\section{Methodology}
In this section, we describe our {\em \textbf{Po}tential wetlands via \textbf{T}ransfer learning and \textbf{A}daptive propagation (PoTA)} algorithm, designed to tackle the data sparsity challenge in wetland prioritization.
Figure \ref{fig:model} provides an overview of the overall architecture, where we introduce the key components of the model below:
\begin{itemize}[leftmargin=*]
\item \textbf{(Feature Processing -- Section~\ref{sec:feature})}
Input features (for both source and target regions) are vectorized through discretization or normalization based on their types.
\item \textbf{(Transfer Learning -- Section~\ref{sec:kt})} Three latent feature extractors (LFEs) are applied to these features to capture domain-aware knowledge. Specifically, a domain discriminator aids the extraction of two sets of (source and target) domain-specific latent features along with one set of shared latent features. The shared latent features serve as the bridge that enables knowledge transfer from the (wetland-rich) source region to the target region.
%by guiding a common FE to act as a knowledge transfer module, while directing the others to extract domain-specific information.
\item \textbf{(Adaptive Propagation -- Section~\ref{sec:ap})} In the next step, we apply adaptive propagation on top of the extracted latent features.
%considering the labels between adjacent cells. Considering the location of each cell,
In particular, the proposed algorithm learns whether information propagation between the two cells should be positive or whether the information impact of one cell on another should be negative.
% if the labels of adjacent cells are likely to be the same. Otherwise, we either decrease or reverse the weight of the edges.
\end{itemize}
Finally, the combined latent features train wetland classifiers for the source and target regions.
\subsection{\textbf{Feature Processing and Extraction}}\label{sec:feature}
%Here, we introduce the elements of the soil and HAND datasets (Table~\ref{tab:sh}).
%The Soil and HAND datasets have 31 and single elements, respectively.
\subsubsection{Soil Data} This dataset includes discrete classes like flood frequency and elements with continuous values, like available water storage. We encode these features as follows:
\begin{itemize}
\item \textbf{Discrete features} are one-hot encoded.
% Let us take the first element (flood frequency) $i_1$ as an example, which has five types of classes. For specific grid $e$, we can vectorize them as below:
% \begin{equation}
% s_{1,e}=\{1, 0, 0, 0, 0\}, \,\, \iff \, s_{1,e}=None
% \end{equation}
Note that, some discrete features, like flood frequency, are ordinal rather than categorical. In this implementation, we ignore the distinction between these two types of discrete values and use one-hot encoding for both.
%\from{selcuk}{The extension of the approach to ordinal values, through the use of $k$-hot encoding, for $k^{th}$ element in the order, is trivial.}
\item \textbf{Continuous features,} such as water storage, are normalized to the range $[0,1]$ by dividing to the maximum value among all the cells in the source and target regions.
% \begin{equation}
% s_{2,e}={s_{2,e} \over \max(s_2)}.
% \end{equation}
\end{itemize}
\subsubsection{HAND Data} Based on the domain expert feedback, the HAND dataset is binarized using a $2m$ threshold. Specifically, for any cell where the height above the nearest drainage is greater than or equal to $2m$, the value of $h_c$ is set to $1$; otherwise, $h_c$ is set to 0.
%hydrologist and recent research findings as follows:
%\begin{equation}
%\begin{gathered}
%h_c \in
% \begin{cases}
% 1, & \text{if}\,\,\, h_c \geq 2m\\
% 0, & \text{if}\,\,\, h_c < 2m
% \end{cases}
%\end{gathered}
%\end{equation}
\subsection{Transfer Learning}\label{sec:kt}
In this section, we introduce the transfer learning techniques we developed to effectively bring information learned from the wetland-rich source region to the target region with few wetlands.
%
In particular, the encoded input feature vectors for both source and target regions are fed into the two layers of neural networks, referred to as latent feature extractors (LFEs). As shown in Figure \ref{fig:model}, these three LFEs generate four outputs; source-domain specific latent features of the source ($l^s_{spe}$),
target-domain specific latent features of the target ($l^t_{spe}$),
shared-domain (or common-domain) latent features of the source ($l^s_{com}$),
and shared-domain latent features of the target ($l^t_{com}$). In this subsection, we present detailed strategies to guide this process for effectively extracting domain-specific and shared-domain latent features.
Domain Adaptation \cite{ganin2016domain} aims to reduce the differences in latent features extracted from two domains.
%
While such an approach may help find domain shareable features, we also need to identify the unique characteristics of regions for wetlands (e.g., Arizona is extremely dry due to its desert climate) \cite{chen2019transferability}. Many approaches have been proposed recently \cite{gretton2005measuring,li2019learning,nema2021disentangling,choi2024based}, but in PoTA, we develop a domain disentanglement strategy, as in \cite{choi2022based}, to capture domain-specific knowledge along with shareable information.
To achieve this, a Gradient Reversal Layer (GRL), which applies a negative multiplier on the back-propagated weights during training, is used before the extracted latent features are fed into a domain discriminator to increase the entropy between the learned latent features.
%
The key is that by applying GRL only to shared-domain features, the domain discriminator is trained to distinguish between the specific characteristics of the two domains effectively.
%
PoTA leverages two layers of fully connected neural networks as the domain discriminator. As can be seen in Figure \ref{fig:model}, for each cell in the source or target region, two features, $l_{com}^*$ and $l_{spe}^*$ (where $* \in \{s,t\}$) are passed separately as inputs to the domain discriminator:
%($F_{disc}$). This equation can be defined as below:
\begin{equation}
\label{domain_label}
\widehat{d}_{com}^*=F_{disc}(l_{com}^*),\, \,\widehat{d}_{spe}^*=F_{disc}(l_{spe}^*).
\end{equation}
% Back in Figure \ref{fig:model}, it can be seen that two additional feature extractors (FEs) capture domain-specific knowledge concurrently, where the losses can be defined as,
%\begin{equation}
%\begin{gathered}
%\widehat{d}^s_{spe}=F_{disc}(l^s_{spe}), \, \,\widehat{d}^t_{spe}=F_{disc}(l^t_{spe})
%\end{gathered}
%\label{d_spe_loss}
%\end{equation}
Here, $\widehat{d}^*$ stands for the predicted domain probability of the input latent feature.
The loss, then, is calculated through binary cross-entropy as follows:
\begin{equation}
\begin{gathered}
\mathcal{L}_{com}^*= -{1 \over N_*}\sum_{s=1}^{N_*} log(1-\widehat{d}^{*}_{com}),
%,\,\,\mathcal{L}_{com}^t = -{1 \over N_t}\sum_{t=1}^{N_t} log(\widehat{d}^{t}_{com})
\\
\mathcal{L}_{spe}^*= -{1 \over N_*}\sum_{s=1}^{N_*} log(1-\widehat{d}^*_{spe}),
%,\,\,\mathcal{L}_{spe}^t = -{1 \over N_t}\sum_{t=1}^{N_t} log(\widehat{d}^t_{spe}).
\end{gathered}
\label{d_inv_loss}
\end{equation}
where $N_s$ and $N_t$ are the training batches for the source and target regions respectively (we omit the true label in the above equation that is binary for the source and target domain, $d \in \{0, 1\}$). %\from{Selcuk}{true label may itself be non-binary!!!}).
%(please read \cite{ganin2016domain} for details). The $N$ is the training batches from each domain. Now, we can define the overall domain losses as follows:
Given this, we define the overall domain loss as,
\begin{equation}
\begin{gathered}
\mathcal{L}_{dom} = \rho(\mathcal{L}_{com}^s +
\mathcal{L}_{spe}^s) + (1-\rho)(\mathcal{L}_{com}^t + \mathcal{L}_{spe}^t),
\end{gathered}
\label{da_loss}
\end{equation}
Here, the ratio $\rho={N_s \over N_s+N_t}$ of the batch sizes serve as the weight for the training of the discriminator concerning the importance of the source domain \cite{ben2010theory}. During training, the domain discriminator is updated using Equation \ref{da_loss}.
%We kindly recommend reading this article \cite{choi2022based} for a more detailed explanation.
\subsection{Adaptive Propagation}\label{sec:ap}
The knowledge transfer between local regions is facilitated by a graph neural network (GNN). Let $\mathcal{G}^*=(\mathcal{V}^*,\mathcal{E}^*, X^*)$ be a graph with $\vert\mathcal{V}^*\vert=n$ nodes, $\vert\mathcal{E}^*\vert=m$ edges, and feature matrix $X^*$. As before, when considering the source region, $* = s$, and when considering the target region, we have $* = t$.
The label matrix corresponding to the given region is denoted as $Y^* \in \mathbb{R}^{n \times C}$, where $C (= 2)$ stands for the number of classes. $A^* \in \{0, 1\}^{n \times n}$ denotes the adjacency matrix for the undirected graph $\mathcal{G}^*$, where the degree of node $i$ is represented as $\delta_{i}=\sum^n_{j=1}{A^*_{ij}}$. The feature matrix, $X^* \in \mathbb{R}^{n \times h}$, where $h$ is the number of dimensions of the latent space.
%
Given the above, the representation of $\mathcal{V}^*$ is updated through message-passing between neighboring nodes.
GNNs have the advantage of addressing data sparsity by incorporating the characteristics of neighboring nodes into their predictions. However, if neighboring cells have very different characteristics, this can lead to performance degradation as the propagated information may serve as noise, rather than enrichment. Therefore, here we propose an adaptive propagation technique to address this issue.
This is achieved by varying the edge weights considering the features of the two neighboring cells corresponding to the edge.
We first average the domain-specific and shared-domain features for all nodes in the given region (i.e., $v_i \in \mathcal{V}^*$):
\begin{equation}
l_i^*={l^*_{spe,i} + l^*_{com,i} \over 2},
\end{equation}
Next, given an edge between $i \leftrightarrow j$, we determine the corresponding edge weight through an attention mechanism:
\begin{equation}
w^*_{ij}=tanh\left((l^*_i + l^*_j)\Vec{a}_*\right),
\end{equation}
where $\Vec{a}_*$ is a learnable attention vector; $tanh$ helps ensure that edge weights satisfy the constraint $-1 \leq w^*_{ij} \leq 1$. Given these edge coefficients, following~\cite{bo2021beyond}, we update node features as follows:
\begin{equation}
\label{message_passing}
l^{*, (\gamma)}_i=l_i^{*, (0)}+\sum_{j \in \mathcal{N}_i}{w^*_{ij} \over \sqrt{\delta_i \delta_j}}l^{*, (\gamma-1)}_j,
\end{equation}
where, $\mathcal{N}_i$ denotes the set of neighbors of node $i$ with incoming edges into $i$. As defined earlier, $\delta$ and $(\gamma)$ denote the degree of a node and hidden layer, respectively.
\subsection{Classification}
Assuming $L$ layers of propagation, the final output of the adaptive propagation is an enriched latent representation $l_i^{*, (L)}$ for $v_i \in \mathcal{V}^*$. This is fed into a fully connected network, $W^* \in \mathcal{R}^{h \times C}$, with input dimensionality $h$, and output dimension of $C (=2)$, corresponding to "wetland" and "no-wetland", respectively.
Given the final output, $f^{*, (L)} \in \mathcal{R}^{N_* \times C}$ (where $N_s$ and $N_t$ are the training batches for the source and target regions respectively), the wetland probability is given by:
\[f^{*, (L)} = l^{*, (L)} W^*,\]
where we can define the prediction loss using the negative log-likelihood function as follows:
\begin{equation}
\label{pred_loss}
\mathcal{L}^*_{pred}=-{1 \over N_*} \sum^{N_*}_{s=1}\sum^C_{k=1}y_{sk} \log (f^{*, (L)}_{sk}).
\end{equation}
%\from{Selcuk}{As we discussed, loss for different classes can look different, considering asymmetric recall and precision.}
\subsection{Optimization and Inference}
%We introduce the optimization strategy and inference below.
\textbf{(Optimization)} We optimize the model using domain loss, $\mathcal{L}_{dom}$ (Eq. \ref{da_loss}), and prediction loss, $\mathcal{L}_{pred}$ (Eq. \ref{pred_loss}) as below:
\begin{equation}
\label{overall_loss}
\mathcal{L}=\mathcal{L}^s_{pred}+\mathcal{L}^t_{pred}+\lambda \mathcal{L}_{dom}.
\end{equation}
Here, $\lambda$ adjusts the weight of domain loss to help stable convergence. During optimization, we employ the Adam optimizer with early stopping based on the validation score.
\textbf{(Inference)} After convergence, we forward the features of each cell in a target domain to the common and target LFEs, followed by the adaptive GNN for wetland prioritization.
\subsection{Theoretical Analysis} \label{theo_anal}
This section provides theoretical background on why domain disentanglement and signed propagation are necessary for this task.
\begin{manualtheorem}{4.1}[Domain disentanglement]\label{thm1}
Let us assume a domain identifier $\mathcal{D} \in \{\mathcal{S},\mathcal{T}\}$. Regardless of a specific domain $\mathcal{D}$, the mutual information (\textbf{I}) between the domain-common feature $l^*_{com}$ and domain-specific one $l^*_{spe}$ \cite{hwang2020variational} can be decomposed as below:
\begin{equation}
I(l^*_{spe};l^*_{com})=-I(\mathcal{D};l^*_{spe},l^*_{com})+I(\mathcal{D};l^*_{spe})+I(\mathcal{D};l^*_{com})
\end{equation}
Then, we get $I(\mathcal{D};l^*_{spe},l^*_{com})=I(\mathcal{D};l^*_{spe})+I(\mathcal{D};l^*_{com})-I(l^*_{spe};l^*_{com})$ with a slight modification. Since $I(\mathcal{D};l^*_{com})$ is maximized by a domain discriminator and $I(l^*_{spe};l^*_{com})$ is minimized through the objective function (wetland identification), we can infer $I(\mathcal{D};l^*_{spe},l^*_{com}) \geq I(\mathcal{D};l^*_{spe})$ that is more informative for training.
\end{manualtheorem}
\begin{manualtheorem}{4.2}[Adaptive propagation]\label{thm2}
Adaptive propagation determines the weight and sign of edges based on features. While a positive signed edge has the effect of smoothing between connected nodes, the negative edges increase the separability. Let us assume two nodes $i,j$ connected with a positive edge, where the label of node $i$ is $k$. Given the negative likelihood loss $\mathcal{L}_{nll}(Y_i,\widehat{Y}_i)_k=-\log(\widehat{y}_{i,k})$, the gradient of node $i$ is defined as
${\partial \mathcal{L}_{nll}(Y_i,\widehat{Y}_i)_k / \partial \widehat{y}_{i,k}}$. Similarly, the gradient of neighboring node $j$ follows:
\begin{equation}
\nabla_j\mathcal{L}_{nll}(Y_i,\widehat{Y}_i)_k = {\partial \mathcal{L}_{nll}(Y_i,\widehat{Y}_i)_k \over \partial \widehat{y}_{i,k}} \cdot {\partial \widehat{y}_{i,k} \over \partial h^{(L)}_{\textbf{i},k}} \cdot {\partial h^{(L)}_{\textbf{i},k} \over \partial h^{(L)}_{\textbf{j},k}}
\end{equation}
Since $\partial h^{(L)}_{\textbf{i},k} / \partial h^{(L)}_{\textbf{j},k} > 0$ with positive connection, we can infer that node $j$ will get closer to node $i$ proportional to the $|\eta \partial h^{(L)}_{\textbf{i},k} / \partial h^{(L)}_{\textbf{j},k}|$. Vice versa, the gradient has the opposite sign but the same scale.
\end{manualtheorem}
\subsection{Computational Complexity}
Our model consists of two main components; feature extraction with domain disentanglement and adaptive propagation. The first module can be approximated as $\mathcal{O}((A+B) \cdot N \cdot e)$, where $A$ and $B$ refer to the time of forward passing in feature extraction and domain discriminator. $N$ is the input size and $e$ is the number of training epochs. The cost of the second module is dominated by the cost of the GNN, $\mathcal{O}(|\mathcal{E}|\theta_{GNN})$, which is proportional to the number, $|\mathcal{E}|$, of edges in the considered graphs and the number, $\theta_{GNN}$, of trainable parameters. Since our method further employs edge weight retrieval using the coordinates, the complexity becomes $\mathcal{O}(|\mathcal{E}|\theta_{GNN}+|\mathcal{E}|\theta_{Adapt}$). Thus, the cost of the entire module can be $\mathcal{O}\left((A+B) \cdot N \cdot e+|\mathcal{E}|(\theta_{GNN}+\theta_{Adapt})\right)$.
\begin{table}[t]
\caption{Details of the benchmark datasets}
\label{dataset}
\centering
\footnotesize
%\begin{adjustbox}{width=0.48\textwidth}
\begin{tabular}{c|lll}
\multicolumn{1}{l}{} & \multicolumn{1}{l}{} & & \\
\Xhline{2\arrayrulewidth}
\multicolumn{1}{c|}{Domain} & Region & \# wetland cells & \# cells \\
\Xhline{2\arrayrulewidth}
\multirow{3}{*}{Source}
& Arizona (AZ, sparse) & 6.05 K (0.6 \%) & 1.05 M \\
& Washington (WA, moderate) & 23.2 K (2.2 \%) & 1.05 M \\
& Florida (FL, dense) & 0.12 M (12 \%) & 1.04 M \\
%& Yelp & 1.9 M & 0.2 M & 8.1 M \\
\hline
\multirow{3}{*}{Target} & Texas (TX, sparse) & 1.21 K (0.1 \%) & 1.12 M \\
& Oregon (OR, moderate) & 15.6 K (1.5 \%) & 1.05 M \\
& Louisiana (LA, dense) & 0.09 M (8.3 \%) & 1.05 M \\
\Xhline{2\arrayrulewidth}
\end{tabular}
%\end{adjustbox}
\end{table}
\section{Experiments}
In this section, we investigate three key questions that characterize the proposed method and provide a comprehensive analysis:
%In addition, the details of the following research questions (RQs) are explained from Section \ref{rq1} to Section \ref{rq4}:
\begin{itemize}[leftmargin=*]
\item \textbf{RQ1:} Does the proposed model achieve good performance compared to state-of-the-art baselines?
\item \textbf{RQ2:} How much do domain disentanglement and adaptive propagation contribute to the overall performance? Does the shareable knowledge help to solve the sparsity issue?
%\item \textbf{RQ3:} What would the performance be if a prediction is made using either domain-specific or domain-shareable features? What happens if we do not use adaptive propagation?
\item \textbf{RQ3:} Does domain disentanglement effectively distinguish between domain-specific and domain-shareable features?
\end{itemize}
\begin{table}[t]
\small
%\setlength{\tabcolsep}{.98em}
\centering
\caption{ (RQ1) Accuracy ($\%$) and recall ($\%$) for 3 target regions -- bold with underline indicate best accuracy and recall}
\label{tab:performance}
\centerline{
%\begin{tabularx}{\textwidth}
%\begin{adjustbox}{width=0.7\textwidth}
\begin{adjustbox}{width=\columnwidth}
\begin{tabular}{@{}c|c|c|ccc|ccc|ccc@{}}
\cmidrule[2pt]{1-12}
\multirow{2}{*}{} & \multirow{2}{*}{Method} & \multirow{2}{*}{Metric} & \multicolumn{3}{c|}{\underline{Texas}} & \multicolumn{3}{c|}{\underline{Oregon}} & \multicolumn{3}{c}{\underline{Louisiana}} \\
& & & AZ & WA & FL & AZ & WA & FL & AZ & WA & FL \\
\cmidrule[1.5pt]{1-12}
\multirow{8}{*}{\rotatebox{90}{Single-Domain}} & \multirow{1}{*}{MLP} & Acc. & \multicolumn{3}{c|}{82.0} & \multicolumn{3}{c|}{85.9} & \multicolumn{3}{c}{89.3} \\
& \multirow{1}{*}{(2 layers)} & Rec. & \multicolumn{3}{c|}{62.6} & \multicolumn{3}{c|}{94.6} & \multicolumn{3}{c}{99.0} \\ \cline{2-12}
& \multirow{1}{*}{GCN} & Acc. & \multicolumn{3}{c|}{82.8} & \multicolumn{3}{c|}{91.0} & \multicolumn{3}{c}{91.3} \\
& \multirow{1}{*}{\cite{kipf2016semi}}& Rec. & \multicolumn{3}{c|}{63.1} & \multicolumn{3}{c|}{92.0} & \multicolumn{3}{c}{99.1} \\ \cline{2-12}
& \multirow{1}{*}{GAT} & Acc. & \multicolumn{3}{c|}{80.7} & \multicolumn{3}{c|}{84.7} & \multicolumn{3}{c}{90.4} \\
& \multirow{1}{*}{\cite{velickovic2017graph}} & Rec. & \multicolumn{3}{c|}{68.3} & \multicolumn{3}{c|}{77.8} & \multicolumn{3}{c}{98.8} \\ \cline{2-12}
& \multirow{1}{*}{FAGCN } & Acc. & \multicolumn{3}{c|}{82.5} & \multicolumn{3}{c|}{91.8} & \multicolumn{3}{c}{91.5} \\
& \multirow{1}{*}{\cite{bo2021beyond}}& Rec. & \multicolumn{3}{c|}{62.9} & \multicolumn{3}{c|}{86.7} & \multicolumn{3}{c}{99.5} \\
\cmidrule[1.5pt]{1-12}
\multirow{8}{*}{\rotatebox[origin=c]{90}{Cross-Domain}} & \multirow{1}{*}{DAREC} & Acc. & 81.2 & 81.3 & 84.0 & 84.4 & 86.5 & 86.2 & 88.4 & 89.4 & 89.4 \\
& \multirow{1}{*}{\cite{yuan2019darec}} & Rec. & 62.0 & 62.3 & 68.9 & 79.3 & 82.1 & 96.2 & 96.6 & 97.3 & 96.8 \\ \cline{2-12}
& \multirow{1}{*}{MMT } & Acc. & 82.0 & 83.0 & 83.1 & 86.2 & 86.6 & 86.0 & 89.1 & 91.3 & 91.3 \\
& \multirow{1}{*}{\cite{krishnan2020transfer}}& Rec. & 63.7 & 66.0 & 67.7 & 92.3 & 93.6 & 90.5 & 98.5 & 99.1 & 99.4 \\ \cline{2-12}
& \multirow{1}{*}{SER} & Acc. & 83.5 & 84.0 & 84.3 & 87.2 & 86.4 & 86.8 & 91.0 & 90.1 & 89.0 \\
& \multirow{1}{*}{\cite{choi2022based}}& Rec. & 66.6 & 67.2 & 67.5 & 91.2 & 91.4 & 92.8 & 99.3 & 98.3 & 97.1 \\ \cline{2-12}
& \multirow{1}{*}{DH-GAT} & Acc. & 83.4 & 85.1 & 86.5 & 88.8 & 90.7 & 90.2 & 90.6 & 91.5 & 91.4 \\
& \multirow{1}{*}{\cite{xu2023decoupled}} & Rec. & 70.4 & 74.0 & 74.9 & 95.8 & 92.0 & 97.3 & 99.1 & 99.7 & 99.6 \\
\cmidrule[1.5pt]{1-12}
\multirow{2}{*}{\rotatebox[origin=c]{90}{Ours}}& \multirow{2}{*}{PoTA} & Acc. & 84.1 & 85.4 & \underline{\textbf{87.2}} & 92.1 & \underline{\textbf{93.0}} & 92.6 & 92.2 & 92.3 & \underline{\textbf{92.5}} \\
& & Rec. & 70.8 & 74.2 & \underline{\textbf{77.0}} & 96.0 & 97.8 & \underline{\textbf{98.1}} & 99.5 & 99.6 & \underline{\textbf{99.8}} \\ \cmidrule[2pt]{1-12}
%\end{tabularx}
\end{tabular}
\end{adjustbox}
}
\end{table}
\subsection{Datasets, Baselines, and Setup} \label{datasets}
\textbf{(Datasets)} In Section \ref{data_source}, we introduced the details of three datasets; NLCD, Soil, and HAND. In this section, we consider 6 regions of the US with varying wetland characteristics~Table \ref{dataset}.
%We used data from three regions for both the source and target domains, depending on the proportion of wetlands.
%Since the scale of the dataset was standardized based on the NLCD, we display the cells of wetlands and the total for each region.
\noindent \textbf{(Baselines)} We consider 8 state-of-the-art methods, both single-domain and cross-domain, listed in Table~\ref{tab:performance}. As a hyperparameter, we set $\lambda=0.2$ in Eq. \ref{overall_loss} for our model. In addition, the learning ratio is set as $1e^{-3}$ with the early stopping of 300 epochs for all baselines.
%\from{Selcuk}{is this the only relevant hyperparameter?nothign else?}
%\from{selcuk}{Default parameters are used for the baselines. (??)}
%Four are based on single-domain approaches, while the others utilize knowledge transfer techniques additionally.
%\from{Selcuk}{hyperparameters???}
\noindent \textbf{(Experimental setup)} Training/validation/testing sets are split 10\%/40\%/50\% for all methods. We utilized PyTorch, torch-geometric, and a single GPU (Nvidia Titan Xp) for evaluation. For reproducibility, we uploaded the source codes to our \textit{GitHub}\footnote{https://github.com/ChoiYoonHyuk/Wetland}.
%\footnote{https://anonymous.4open.science/r/Wetland-B218/}. %\from{Selcuk}{Doesn't need to be anonymous. This looks like the paper was rejected from somewhere else!}
% Table generated by Excel2LaTeX from sheet 'Heatmap'
\begin{table}[t]
\centering
\caption{(RQ1) Wetland prediction accuracy as a function of the wetland density: sparse regions generally lead to lower prediction accuracy and they greatly benefit from knowledge transfer from a dense region (such as FL)}
\begin{adjustbox}{width=1\columnwidth}
\begin{tabular}{r|cc|cc|cc|}
\cline{2-7} & \multicolumn{6}{c|}{\textbf{Region}} \\
\cline{2-7} & \multicolumn{2}{c|}{\textbf{Sparse}} & \multicolumn{2}{c|}{\textbf{Moderate}} & \multicolumn{2}{c|}{\textbf{Dense}} \\
& \textbf{TX:0.1\%} & \textbf{AZ:0.6\%} & \textbf{OR:1.5\%} & \textbf{WA:2.2\%} & \textbf{LA:8.3\%} & \textbf{FL:12\%} \\
\cline{2-7} \textbf{w/o KT} & 83.5\% & 61.4\% & 91.4\% & 81.8\% & 91.9\% & 88.4\% \\
\textbf{KT from FL} & 87.2\% & 66.6\% & 92.6\% & 82.7\% & 92.5\% & 88.4\% \\
\cline{2-7} \textbf{Gain from KT} & 4.4\% & 8.5\% & 1.3\% & 1.1\% & 0.7\% & 0.0\% \\
\cline{2-7}
\end{tabular}%
\end{adjustbox}
\label{tab:acc1}%
\end{table}%
% Table generated by Excel2LaTeX from sheet 'Heatmap'
\begin{table}[t]
\centering
\caption{(RQ1) Accuracy gains due to knowledge transfer: gains are higher when the knowledge is transferred from denser regions (LA and FL) to sparser regions (TX and AZ)}
\begin{adjustbox}{width=1\columnwidth}
\begin{tabular}{rr|ccccccc}\cline{3-8}
& & \multicolumn{6}{c|}{\textbf{Target}} & \\
\cline{3-8} & & \textbf{TX:0.1\%} & \textbf{AZ:0.6\%} & \textbf{OR:1.5\%} & \textbf{WA:2.2\%} & \textbf{LA:8.3\%} & \multicolumn{1}{c|}{\textbf{FL:12\%}} & \textbf{AVG} \\ \hline
\multicolumn{1}{c|}{\multirow{6}[1]{*}
{\rotatebox{90}{\textbf{Source}}}
} & \textbf{TX:0.1\%} & \cellcolor[rgb]{ .988, .988, 1}0.0\% & \cellcolor[rgb]{ .871, .941, .902}1.1\% & \cellcolor[rgb]{ .914, .961, .937}0.7\% & \cellcolor[rgb]{ .957, .976, .973}0.3\% & \cellcolor[rgb]{ .949, .973, .965}0.4\% & \multicolumn{1}{c|}{\cellcolor[rgb]{ .937, .969, .957}0.5\%} & 0.6\% \\
\multicolumn{1}{c|}{} & \textbf{AZ:0.6\%} & \cellcolor[rgb]{ .925, .965, .945}0.6\% & \cellcolor[rgb]{ .988, .988, 1}0.0\% & \cellcolor[rgb]{ .906, .957, .929}0.8\% & \cellcolor[rgb]{ .988, .988, 1}0.0\% & \cellcolor[rgb]{ .957, .976, .973}0.3\% & \multicolumn{1}{c|}{\cellcolor[rgb]{ .957, .976, .973}0.3\%} & 0.4\% \\
\multicolumn{1}{c|}{} & \textbf{OR:1.5\%} & \cellcolor[rgb]{ .765, .898, .808}2.1\% & \cellcolor[rgb]{ .765, .898, .808}2.1\% & \cellcolor[rgb]{ .988, .988, 1}0.0\% & \cellcolor[rgb]{ .925, .965, .945}0.6\% & \cellcolor[rgb]{ .957, .976, .973}0.3\% & \multicolumn{1}{c|}{\cellcolor[rgb]{ .925, .965, .945}0.6\%} & 1.1\% \\
\multicolumn{1}{c|}{} & \textbf{WA:2.2\%} & \cellcolor[rgb]{ .788, .906, .827}1.9\% & \cellcolor[rgb]{ .71, .878, .761}2.6\% & \cellcolor[rgb]{ .82, .922, .855}1.6\% & \cellcolor[rgb]{ .988, .988, 1}0.0\% & \cellcolor[rgb]{ .949, .973, .965}0.4\% & \multicolumn{1}{c|}{\cellcolor[rgb]{ .937, .969, .957}0.5\%} & 1.4\% \\
\multicolumn{1}{c|}{} & \textbf{LA:8.3\%} & \cellcolor[rgb]{ .388, .745, .482}5.6\% & \cellcolor[rgb]{ .659, .855, .714}3.1\% & \cellcolor[rgb]{ .894, .953, .918}0.9\% & \cellcolor[rgb]{ .863, .937, .89}1.2\% & \cellcolor[rgb]{ .988, .988, 1}0.0\% & \multicolumn{1}{c|}{\cellcolor[rgb]{ .914, .961, .937}0.7\%} & 2.3\% \\
\multicolumn{1}{c|}{} & \textbf{FL:12\%} & \cellcolor[rgb]{ .592, .831, .659}3.7\% & \cellcolor[rgb]{ .431, .765, .522}5.2\% & \cellcolor[rgb]{ .863, .937, .89}1.2\% & \cellcolor[rgb]{ .894, .953, .918}0.9\% & \cellcolor[rgb]{ .925, .965, .945}0.6\% & \multicolumn{1}{c|}{\cellcolor[rgb]{ .988, .988, 1}0.0\%} & 2.3\% \\
\cline{1-9} & \textbf{AVG} & 2.8\% & 2.8\% & 1.0\% & 0.6\% & 0.4\% & \multicolumn{1}{c|}{0.5\%} & \\
%\cline{1-8}
\end{tabular}%
\end{adjustbox}
\label{tab:acc2}%
\end{table}%
\begin{figure}[t]
\includegraphics[width=0.3\textwidth]{assets/benefit.pdf}
\caption{(RQ1) While knowledge transfer always provides gains, sparser regions benefit most from being the target, whereas denser regions are best used as the source domains }
\label{fig:benefit}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Comparison with Baselines (RQ1)} \label{rq1}
In Table~\ref{tab:performance}, we present accuracy and recall results to compare PoTA to the baselines.
%are employed as metrics for a fair comparison.
Firstly, we see that PoTA provides the best accuracy and recall.
%
We see that, as expected, for the sparse target (Texas), cross-domain methods achieve better results, while the performance gap is smaller in dense domains (Oregon and Louisiana). In particular, knowledge transfer from the dense (Florida) to the sparse (Texas) domain significantly improves the quality of prediction.
%Although this advantage diminishes in a dense area (Louisiana), our method still achieves the best results with the aid of adaptive propagation. Lastly,
%
Along with knowledge transfer, we claim that adaptive propagation also plays an important role in performance improvement. This can be observed when using Arizona as the source domain (sparse). Despite our model gaining almost no benefit from knowledge transfer, significant performance improvements can be seen compared to GCN \cite{kipf2016semi} and GAT \cite{velickovic2017graph} across three datasets.
\textbf{(Overview)} %\label{sec:overview}
%Before we attempt to answer the RQs posed earlier, we first provide a high-level overview of the need for knowledge transfer in wetland prioritization.
The high-level overview of the need for knowledge transfer in wetland prioritization can be summarized as follows. Let us first consider Table~\ref{tab:acc1}, where we see that knowledge transfer from a wetland-rich region, FL, is providing significant gains in accuracy, especially in regions, such as TX and AZ, where wetlands are sparse. These results are confirmed in Table~\ref{tab:acc2} and Figure~\ref{fig:benefit}: while knowledge transfer always provides positive gains in accuracy, sparser regions benefit most from being the target, whereas denser regions are best used as the source.
\begin{table}[!t]
\setlength{\tabcolsep}{1.5em}
% \ra{1.}
\centering
\small
\caption{(RQ2) Accuracy and recall with ablation for domain disentanglement (DD) and adaptive propagation (AP)
}
\begin{adjustbox}{width=1\columnwidth}
{
\begin{tabular}{
lcccccc
}
\toprule
\toprule
& \multicolumn{2}{c}{TX (from FL)} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{OR (from WA)} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{LA (from FL)} \\
\cmidrule(l){2-3} \cmidrule(l){4-5} \cmidrule(l){6-7}
Methods & Acc. & Rec. & Acc. & Rec. & Acc. & Rec. \\
\cmidrule(l){1-2} \cmidrule(l){2-3} \cmidrule(l){4-5} \cmidrule(l){6-7}
w/o DD & 84.4 & 73.6& 88.3 & 92.1 & 91.4 & 99.4 \\
w/o AP & 84.9 & 76.1 & 87.6 & 90.5 & 90.9 & 99.0 \\
PoTA & 87.2 & 77.0 & 93.0 & 97.8 & 92.5 & 99.8 \\
\midrule
\bottomrule
\end{tabular}
}
\end{adjustbox}
\label{tab:ablation}
\end{table}
\begin{figure}[t]
% \centerline{
% \includegraphics[width=0.48\textwidth]{assets/case2.pdf}
% }
% \vspace*{-0.1in}
% \centerline{
% \footnotesize \;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;Texas\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;Oregon\;\;\;\;\;Louisiana\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;Texas\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;Oregon\;\;\;\;\;Louisiana\;\;\;\;\;\;
%}
%%\vspace*{-0.05in}
%\centerline{\footnotesize \;\;(a) feature ablation\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;(b) prop. ablation}
\centerline{
\begin{tabular}{c}
\vspace*{-0.1in}\includegraphics[width=2.5in]{assets/caseA.pdf}\\
\;\;\;\;\;\;Texas\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;Oregon\;\;\;\;\;Louisiana\\
(a) feature ablation \\
\vspace*{-0.1in}\includegraphics[width=2.5in]{assets/caseB.pdf}\\
\;\;\;\;\;\;Texas\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;Oregon\;\;\;\;\;Louisiana\\
%(a) feature ablation &(
(b) propagation ablation
\end{tabular}
}
\vspace*{-0.1in}
\caption{(RQ2) Accuracy impact of (a) using domain-specific vs. domain-shareable features and (b) adaptive propagation}
\label{fig:case}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Impact of Disentanglement, Sharing, and Adaptive Propagation (RQ2)} \label{rq2}
One exception in Table~\ref{tab:performance} is for the target OR, for which the nearby region, WA, with moderate wetlands, has a greater impact as a source than the wetland-rich region, FL.
%
This makes sense as WA is likely to share more with OR, which can help boost predictions in OR even though it has fewer wetlands than FL.
%region is likely to share , which can be more helpful even with fewer wetlands.
This illustrates the importance of the shared-domain knowledge.
In Table \ref{tab:ablation}, we present an ablation study to test the efficacy of domain disentanglement and adaptive propagation. Specifically, we either remove the domain loss in Eq.~\ref{da_loss} for PoTA (w/o DD) or propagation in Eq. \ref{message_passing} for PoTA (w/o AP). For each of the three targets, we select the source domain that achieved the best performance in Table~\ref{tab:performance}. From the result, we see that excluding domain loss, which hampers region-to-region knowledge transfer, leads to the lowest performance for the sparse domain (Texas). However, it can be found that adaptive propagation plays a more crucial role for denser regions (Oregon and Louisiana) by enabling within-region knowledge transfer.
%\subsection{Case Study (RQ3)} \label{rq3}
In Figure~\ref{fig:case}, we further investigate the impacts of the selected latent features (upper) or the propagation scheme (lower).
%For each domain, we plot the accuracy of two variants (1) and (2) along with our original model (3).
As seen in the upper chart, as expected, (2) domain-specific training yields better performance than training only with (1) shared-domain features. However, (3) PoTA effectively combines advantages of the both features for superior performance (Theorem \ref{thm1}).
%indicating that domain-shareable knowledge is still required in a target domain.
For the lower chart of Figure~\ref{fig:case}, we replace adaptive propagation with GCN~\cite{kipf2016semi} and GAT~\cite{velickovic2017graph} style propagation: as we see in the chart, adaptive propagation provides the highest accuracy, emphasizing the necessity of distinguishing between the like and unlike neighbors during information exchange (Theorem \ref{thm2}).
\begin{figure}[t]
\centerline{
%\includegraphics[width=0.49\textwidth]{assets/tsne_viz.png}}
%\vspace*{-0.12in} \centerline{\footnotesize \;\;\;\; \;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;(a) w/o domain disentanglement\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;(b) w/ domain disentanglement \;\;\;\;}
\begin{tabular}{cc}
\includegraphics[width=1.6in]{assets/tsne_nodis.pdf}&
\includegraphics[width=1.6in]{assets/tsne_dis.pdf}\\
(a) w/o domain disentanglement & (b) w/ domain disentanglement
\end{tabular}
}
\vspace*{-0.1in}
\caption{(RQ3) t-distributed Stochastic Neighbor Embedding (t-SNE) based visualization of the latent features on Texas (TX). Louisiana (LA) is the source domain
% to show the efficacy of a domain disentanglement
}
\label{fig:viz}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Impact of Feature Disentanglement (RQ3)} \label{rq4}
To demonstrate the contribution of domain disentanglement to the separation of extracted features, we sampled 500 cells from each domain. Then, we visualized the latent vectors from feature extractors in Figure \ref{fig:viz}. Specifically, these vectors comprise source-specific ($l^s_{spe}$), source-shared ($l^s_{shr}$), target-specific ($l^t_{spe}$), and target-shared ($l^t_{shr}$) features. Referring to Figure \ref{fig:viz}a, it is evident that the shared features ($l^s_{shr}$ and $l^t_{shr}$) do not properly overlap. Additionally, some source-specific features ($l^s_{spe}$) overlap with the target-specific ones ($l^t_{spe}$), indicating a lack of effective disentanglement. Conversely, Figure \ref{fig:viz}b demonstrates that shared domain features overlap with each other, while domain-specific features are well separated along with the domain-shared features.
\section{CONCLUSIONS}
Wetlands are essential, yet they are insufficient in many regions. Existing approaches to prioritizing potential future wetland locations rely heavily on expert knowledge. While data-driven techniques show promise to help guide experts, most of the US wetlands account for only about 6\% of the land cover, making data sparsity a major challenge. In this paper, we propose addressing this through region-to-region and within-region knowledge transfer through domain dis-entanglement and adaptive propagation. This led to a 6.1\% improvement in accuracy
%compared to the plain MLP
in regions where wetlands are sparse. We believe this could make a significant contribution to dry regions, like the southwestern US.
%\subsubsection*{\normalfont{\textbf{Acknowledgments}}} The acknowledgment is empty during the review process
\bibliographystyle{ACM-Reference-Format}
\bibliography{references.bib}
\end{document}
\begin{table*}[t]
\centering
\caption{ As in Table \ref{performance_ndcg}, we conduct ablation study using four benchmark datasets. We measured the performance of our model HEAD$\mathrm{^*_P}$ with Poincaré Glove when degree normalization and scale alignment were removed, respectively}
\label{ablation_study}
\begin{tabularx}{\textwidth}{@{}c||c|ccc|ccc|ccc|ccc@{}}
\Xhline{2\arrayrulewidth}
\Xhline{2\arrayrulewidth}
\multirow{2}{*}{Method} & \multirow{2}{*}{Metric} & \multicolumn{3}{c|}{\underline{Office Product}} & \multicolumn{3}{c|}{\underline{Instant Video}} & \multicolumn{3}{c|}{\underline{Automotive}} & \multicolumn{3}{c}{\underline{Patio Lawn and Garden}} \\
& & Baby & KS & TG & Baby & KS & TG & Baby & KS & TG & Baby & KS & TG \\
\Xhline{2\arrayrulewidth}
\Xhline{2\arrayrulewidth}
HEAD$\mathrm{^*_P}$ & Acc.CG@10 & \textbf{0.891} & \textbf{0.885} & \textbf{0.888} & \textbf{0.889} & \textbf{0.896} & \textbf{0.892} & \textbf{0.889} & \textbf{0.895} & \textbf{0.892} & \textbf{0.901} & \textbf{0.908} & \textbf{0.913} \\ \cline{2-14}
(w/o degree norm) & Recall@10 & \textbf{0.891} & \textbf{0.885} & \textbf{0.888} & \textbf{0.889} & \textbf{0.896} & \textbf{0.892} & \textbf{0.889} & \textbf{0.895} & \textbf{0.892} & \textbf{0.901} & \textbf{0.908} & \textbf{0.913} \\
\Xhline{2\arrayrulewidth}
\Xhline{2\arrayrulewidth}
HEAD$\mathrm{^*_P}$ & Acc.CG@10 & \textbf{0.891} & \textbf{0.885} & \textbf{0.888} & \textbf{0.889} & \textbf{0.896} & \textbf{0.892} & \textbf{0.889} & \textbf{0.895} & \textbf{0.892} & \textbf{0.901} & \textbf{0.908} & \textbf{0.913} \\ \cline{2-14}
(w/o scale align) & Recall@10 & \textbf{0.891} & \textbf{0.885} & \textbf{0.888} & \textbf{0.889} & \textbf{0.896} & \textbf{0.892} & \textbf{0.889} & \textbf{0.895} & \textbf{0.892} & \textbf{0.901} & \textbf{0.908} & \textbf{0.913} \\
\Xhline{2\arrayrulewidth}
\Xhline{2\arrayrulewidth}
HEAD$\mathrm{^*_P}$ & Acc.CG@10 & \textbf{0.891} & \textbf{0.885} & \textbf{0.888} & \textbf{0.889} & \textbf{0.896} & \textbf{0.892} & \textbf{0.889} & \textbf{0.895} & \textbf{0.892} & \textbf{0.901} & \textbf{0.908} & \textbf{0.913} \\ \cline{2-14}
(original) & Recall@10 & \textbf{0.891} & \textbf{0.885} & \textbf{0.888} & \textbf{0.889} & \textbf{0.896} & \textbf{0.892} & \textbf{0.889} & \textbf{0.895} & \textbf{0.892} & \textbf{0.901} & \textbf{0.908} & \textbf{0.913} \\
\Xhline{2\arrayrulewidth}
\Xhline{2\arrayrulewidth}
\end{tabularx}
\end{table*}
\begin{figure}
%\vspace{5mm}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.49\textwidth]{assets/scale_match.png}
\caption{Scale match}
\label{scale_match}
\end{figure}
\begin{table}
\caption{Surface features from the SSURGO and HAND data sets}
\label{tab:sh}
\centering
\begin{adjustbox}{width=0.43\textwidth}
\begin{tabular}{c|l|l}
\multicolumn{1}{l}{} & \multicolumn{1}{l}{} & \\
\Xhline{2\arrayrulewidth}
\multicolumn{1}{c|}{Data} & Description & Notation \\
\Xhline{2\arrayrulewidth}
\multirow{8}{*}{SSURGO}
& Soil characteristic & $s_1$ \\
& Slope gradient (min, max) & $s_2, s_3$ \\
& Water table depth & $s_4$ \\
& Flood frequency (min, max) & $s_5, s_6$ \\
& Available water storage & $s_7 - s_{10}$\\
& Drainage class & $s_{11}$ \\
& Hydrologic group & $s_{12} - s_{15}$ \\
& Others (position, SOC, and etc) & $s_{16} - s_{34}$ \\
\hline
HAND & Height above the nearest drainage & $s_{35}$\\
\Xhline{2\arrayrulewidth}
\end{tabular}
\end{adjustbox}
\end{table}
%%% -*-BibTeX-*-
%%% Do NOT edit. File created by BibTeX with style
%%% ACM-Reference-Format-Journals [18-Jan-2012].
\begin{thebibliography}{54}
%%% ====================================================================
%%% NOTE TO THE USER: you can override these defaults by providing
%%% customized versions of any of these macros before the \bibliography
%%% command. Each of them MUST provide its own final punctuation,
%%% except for \shownote{}, \showDOI{}, and \showURL{}. The latter two
%%% do not use final punctuation, in order to avoid confusing it with
%%% the Web address.
%%%
%%% To suppress output of a particular field, define its macro to expand
%%% to an empty string, or better, \unskip, like this:
%%%
%%% \newcommand{\showDOI}[1]{\unskip} % LaTeX syntax
%%%
%%% \def \showDOI #1{\unskip} % plain TeX syntax
%%%
%%% ====================================================================
\ifx \showCODEN \undefined \def \showCODEN #1{\unskip} \fi
\ifx \showDOI \undefined \def \showDOI #1{#1}\fi
\ifx \showISBNx \undefined \def \showISBNx #1{\unskip} \fi
\ifx \showISBNxiii \undefined \def \showISBNxiii #1{\unskip} \fi
\ifx \showISSN \undefined \def \showISSN #1{\unskip} \fi
\ifx \showLCCN \undefined \def \showLCCN #1{\unskip} \fi
\ifx \shownote \undefined \def \shownote #1{#1} \fi
\ifx \showarticletitle \undefined \def \showarticletitle #1{#1} \fi
\ifx \showURL \undefined \def \showURL {\relax} \fi
% The following commands are used for tagged output and should be
% invisible to TeX
\providecommand\bibfield[2]{#2}
\providecommand\bibinfo[2]{#2}
\providecommand\natexlab[1]{#1}
\providecommand\showeprint[2][]{arXiv:#2}
\bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{Adam, Mutanga, and Rugege}{Adam et~al\mbox{.}}{2010}]%
{adam2010multispectral}
\bibfield{author}{\bibinfo{person}{Elhadi Adam}, \bibinfo{person}{Onisimo Mutanga}, {and} \bibinfo{person}{Denis Rugege}.} \bibinfo{year}{2010}\natexlab{}.
\newblock \showarticletitle{Multispectral and hyperspectral remote sensing for identification and mapping of wetland vegetation: a review}.
\newblock \bibinfo{journal}{\emph{Wetlands ecology and management}} \bibinfo{volume}{18} (\bibinfo{year}{2010}), \bibinfo{pages}{281--296}.
\newblock
\bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{Ben-David, Blitzer, Crammer, Kulesza, Pereira, and Vaughan}{Ben-David et~al\mbox{.}}{2010}]%
{ben2010theory}
\bibfield{author}{\bibinfo{person}{Shai Ben-David}, \bibinfo{person}{John Blitzer}, \bibinfo{person}{Koby Crammer}, \bibinfo{person}{Alex Kulesza}, \bibinfo{person}{Fernando Pereira}, {and} \bibinfo{person}{Jennifer~Wortman Vaughan}.} \bibinfo{year}{2010}\natexlab{}.
\newblock \showarticletitle{A theory of learning from different domains}.
\newblock \bibinfo{journal}{\emph{Machine learning}} \bibinfo{volume}{79}, \bibinfo{number}{1} (\bibinfo{year}{2010}), \bibinfo{pages}{151--175}.
\newblock
\bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{Bo, Wang, Shi, and Shen}{Bo et~al\mbox{.}}{2021}]%
{bo2021beyond}
\bibfield{author}{\bibinfo{person}{Deyu Bo}, \bibinfo{person}{Xiao Wang}, \bibinfo{person}{Chuan Shi}, {and} \bibinfo{person}{Huawei Shen}.} \bibinfo{year}{2021}\natexlab{}.
\newblock \showarticletitle{Beyond low-frequency information in graph convolutional networks}.
\newblock \bibinfo{journal}{\emph{arXiv preprint arXiv:2101.00797}} (\bibinfo{year}{2021}).
\newblock
\bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{Bonab, Aliannejadi, Vardasbi, Kanoulas, and Allan}{Bonab et~al\mbox{.}}{2021}]%
{bonab2021cross}
\bibfield{author}{\bibinfo{person}{Hamed Bonab}, \bibinfo{person}{Mohammad Aliannejadi}, \bibinfo{person}{Ali Vardasbi}, \bibinfo{person}{Evangelos Kanoulas}, {and} \bibinfo{person}{James Allan}.} \bibinfo{year}{2021}\natexlab{}.
\newblock \showarticletitle{Cross-Market Product Recommendation}. In \bibinfo{booktitle}{\emph{Proceedings of the 30th ACM International Conference on Information \& Knowledge Management}}. \bibinfo{pages}{110--119}.
\newblock
\bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{Cai, Li, Wei, Qiao, Zhang, and Hao}{Cai et~al\mbox{.}}{2019}]%
{cai2019learning}
\bibfield{author}{\bibinfo{person}{Ruichu Cai}, \bibinfo{person}{Zijian Li}, \bibinfo{person}{Pengfei Wei}, \bibinfo{person}{Jie Qiao}, \bibinfo{person}{Kun Zhang}, {and} \bibinfo{person}{Zhifeng Hao}.} \bibinfo{year}{2019}\natexlab{}.
\newblock \showarticletitle{Learning disentangled semantic representation for domain adaptation}. In \bibinfo{booktitle}{\emph{IJCAI: proceedings of the conference}}, Vol.~\bibinfo{volume}{2019}. NIH Public Access, \bibinfo{pages}{2060}.
\newblock
\bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{Cao, Lin, Cong, Ya, Liu, and Wang}{Cao et~al\mbox{.}}{2022}]%
{cao2022disencdr}
\bibfield{author}{\bibinfo{person}{Jiangxia Cao}, \bibinfo{person}{Xixun Lin}, \bibinfo{person}{Xin Cong}, \bibinfo{person}{Jing Ya}, \bibinfo{person}{Tingwen Liu}, {and} \bibinfo{person}{Bin Wang}.} \bibinfo{year}{2022}\natexlab{}.
\newblock \showarticletitle{Disencdr: Learning disentangled representations for cross-domain recommendation}. In \bibinfo{booktitle}{\emph{Proceedings of the 45th International ACM SIGIR Conference on Research and Development in Information Retrieval}}. \bibinfo{pages}{267--277}.
\newblock
\bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{Chen, Wang, Long, and Wang}{Chen et~al\mbox{.}}{2019}]%
{chen2019transferability}
\bibfield{author}{\bibinfo{person}{Xinyang Chen}, \bibinfo{person}{Sinan Wang}, \bibinfo{person}{Mingsheng Long}, {and} \bibinfo{person}{Jianmin Wang}.} \bibinfo{year}{2019}\natexlab{}.
\newblock \showarticletitle{Transferability vs. discriminability: Batch spectral penalization for adversarial domain adaptation}. In \bibinfo{booktitle}{\emph{International conference on machine learning}}. PMLR, \bibinfo{pages}{1081--1090}.
\newblock
\bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{Cheng, Min, Shen, Malon, Zhang, Li, and Carin}{Cheng et~al\mbox{.}}{2020}]%
{cheng2020improving}
\bibfield{author}{\bibinfo{person}{Pengyu Cheng}, \bibinfo{person}{Martin~Renqiang Min}, \bibinfo{person}{Dinghan Shen}, \bibinfo{person}{Christopher Malon}, \bibinfo{person}{Yizhe Zhang}, \bibinfo{person}{Yitong Li}, {and} \bibinfo{person}{Lawrence Carin}.} \bibinfo{year}{2020}\natexlab{}.
\newblock \showarticletitle{Improving disentangled text representation learning with information-theoretic guidance}.
\newblock \bibinfo{journal}{\emph{arXiv preprint arXiv:2006.00693}} (\bibinfo{year}{2020}).
\newblock
\bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{Chien, Peng, Li, and Milenkovic}{Chien et~al\mbox{.}}{2020}]%
{chien2020adaptive}
\bibfield{author}{\bibinfo{person}{Eli Chien}, \bibinfo{person}{Jianhao Peng}, \bibinfo{person}{Pan Li}, {and} \bibinfo{person}{Olgica Milenkovic}.} \bibinfo{year}{2020}\natexlab{}.
\newblock \showarticletitle{Adaptive universal generalized pagerank graph neural network}.
\newblock \bibinfo{journal}{\emph{arXiv preprint arXiv:2006.07988}} (\bibinfo{year}{2020}).
\newblock
\bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{Choi}{Choi}{2024}]%
{choi2024based}
\bibfield{author}{\bibinfo{person}{Yoonhyuk Choi}.} \bibinfo{year}{2024}\natexlab{}.
\newblock \showarticletitle{Based Cross-Domain Recommendation via Hyperbolic Embedding and Hierarchy-Aware Domain Disentanglement}.
\newblock \bibinfo{journal}{\emph{arXiv preprint arXiv:2403.20298}} (\bibinfo{year}{2024}).
\newblock
\bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{Choi, Choi, Ko, Byun, and Kim}{Choi et~al\mbox{.}}{2022a}]%
{choi2022based}
\bibfield{author}{\bibinfo{person}{Yoonhyuk Choi}, \bibinfo{person}{Jiho Choi}, \bibinfo{person}{Taewook Ko}, \bibinfo{person}{Hyungho Byun}, {and} \bibinfo{person}{Chong-Kwon Kim}.} \bibinfo{year}{2022}\natexlab{a}.
\newblock \showarticletitle{Based Domain Disentanglement without Duplicate Users or Contexts for Cross-Domain Recommendation}. In \bibinfo{booktitle}{\emph{Proceedings of the 31st ACM International Conference on Information \& Knowledge Management}}. \bibinfo{pages}{293--303}.
\newblock
\bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{Choi, Choi, Ko, Byun, and Kim}{Choi et~al\mbox{.}}{2022b}]%
{choi2022finding}
\bibfield{author}{\bibinfo{person}{Yoonhyuk Choi}, \bibinfo{person}{Jiho Choi}, \bibinfo{person}{Taewook Ko}, \bibinfo{person}{Hyungho Byun}, {and} \bibinfo{person}{Chong-Kwon Kim}.} \bibinfo{year}{2022}\natexlab{b}.
\newblock \showarticletitle{Finding Heterophilic Neighbors via Confidence-based Subgraph Matching for Semi-supervised Node Classification}. In \bibinfo{booktitle}{\emph{Proceedings of the 31st ACM International Conference on Information \& Knowledge Management}}. \bibinfo{pages}{283--292}.
\newblock
\bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{Dewitz et~al\mbox{.}}{Dewitz et~al\mbox{.}}{2021}]%
{dewitz2021national}
\bibfield{author}{\bibinfo{person}{Jon Dewitz} {et~al\mbox{.}}} \bibinfo{year}{2021}\natexlab{}.
\newblock \showarticletitle{National land cover database (NLCD) 2019 products}.
\newblock \bibinfo{journal}{\emph{US Geological Survey}} \bibinfo{volume}{10} (\bibinfo{year}{2021}), \bibinfo{pages}{P9KZCM54}.
\newblock
\bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{Do and Ng}{Do and Ng}{2005}]%
{do2005transfer}
\bibfield{author}{\bibinfo{person}{Chuong~B Do} {and} \bibinfo{person}{Andrew~Y Ng}.} \bibinfo{year}{2005}\natexlab{}.
\newblock \showarticletitle{Transfer learning for text classification}.
\newblock \bibinfo{journal}{\emph{Advances in neural information processing systems}} \bibinfo{volume}{18} (\bibinfo{year}{2005}).
\newblock
\bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{Fang, Xu, Song, Long, and Zhang}{Fang et~al\mbox{.}}{2022}]%
{fang2022polarized}
\bibfield{author}{\bibinfo{person}{Zheng Fang}, \bibinfo{person}{Lingjun Xu}, \bibinfo{person}{Guojie Song}, \bibinfo{person}{Qingqing Long}, {and} \bibinfo{person}{Yingxue Zhang}.} \bibinfo{year}{2022}\natexlab{}.
\newblock \showarticletitle{Polarized Graph Neural Networks}. In \bibinfo{booktitle}{\emph{Proceedings of the ACM Web Conference 2022}}. \bibinfo{pages}{1404--1413}.
\newblock
\bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{Faulkner, Patrick~Jr, and Gambrell}{Faulkner et~al\mbox{.}}{1989}]%
{faulkner1989field}
\bibfield{author}{\bibinfo{person}{SP Faulkner}, \bibinfo{person}{WH Patrick~Jr}, {and} \bibinfo{person}{RP Gambrell}.} \bibinfo{year}{1989}\natexlab{}.
\newblock \showarticletitle{Field techniques for measuring wetland soil parameters}.
\newblock \bibinfo{journal}{\emph{Soil Science Society of America Journal}} \bibinfo{volume}{53}, \bibinfo{number}{3} (\bibinfo{year}{1989}), \bibinfo{pages}{883--890}.
\newblock
\bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{Ganin, Ustinova, Ajakan, Germain, Larochelle, Laviolette, Marchand, and Lempitsky}{Ganin et~al\mbox{.}}{2016}]%
{ganin2016domain}
\bibfield{author}{\bibinfo{person}{Yaroslav Ganin}, \bibinfo{person}{Evgeniya Ustinova}, \bibinfo{person}{Hana Ajakan}, \bibinfo{person}{Pascal Germain}, \bibinfo{person}{Hugo Larochelle}, \bibinfo{person}{Fran{\c{c}}ois Laviolette}, \bibinfo{person}{Mario Marchand}, {and} \bibinfo{person}{Victor Lempitsky}.} \bibinfo{year}{2016}\natexlab{}.
\newblock \showarticletitle{Domain-adversarial training of neural networks}.
\newblock \bibinfo{journal}{\emph{The Journal of Machine Learning Research}} \bibinfo{volume}{17}, \bibinfo{number}{1} (\bibinfo{year}{2016}), \bibinfo{pages}{2096--2030}.
\newblock
\bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{Garcia~Duran and Niepert}{Garcia~Duran and Niepert}{2017}]%
{garcia2017learning}
\bibfield{author}{\bibinfo{person}{Alberto Garcia~Duran} {and} \bibinfo{person}{Mathias Niepert}.} \bibinfo{year}{2017}\natexlab{}.
\newblock \showarticletitle{Learning graph representations with embedding propagation}.
\newblock \bibinfo{journal}{\emph{Advances in neural information processing systems}} \bibinfo{volume}{30} (\bibinfo{year}{2017}).
\newblock
\bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{Greenhill, Druckenmiller, Wang, Keiser, Girotto, Moore, Yamaguchi, Todeschini, and Shapiro}{Greenhill et~al\mbox{.}}{2024}]%
{greenhill2024machine}
\bibfield{author}{\bibinfo{person}{Simon Greenhill}, \bibinfo{person}{Hannah Druckenmiller}, \bibinfo{person}{Sherrie Wang}, \bibinfo{person}{David~A Keiser}, \bibinfo{person}{Manuela Girotto}, \bibinfo{person}{Jason~K Moore}, \bibinfo{person}{Nobuhiro Yamaguchi}, \bibinfo{person}{Alberto Todeschini}, {and} \bibinfo{person}{Joseph~S Shapiro}.} \bibinfo{year}{2024}\natexlab{}.
\newblock \showarticletitle{Machine learning predicts which rivers, streams, and wetlands the Clean Water Act regulates}.
\newblock \bibinfo{journal}{\emph{Science}} \bibinfo{volume}{383}, \bibinfo{number}{6681} (\bibinfo{year}{2024}), \bibinfo{pages}{406--412}.
\newblock
\bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{Gretton, Bousquet, Smola, and Sch{\"o}lkopf}{Gretton et~al\mbox{.}}{2005}]%
{gretton2005measuring}
\bibfield{author}{\bibinfo{person}{Arthur Gretton}, \bibinfo{person}{Olivier Bousquet}, \bibinfo{person}{Alex Smola}, {and} \bibinfo{person}{Bernhard Sch{\"o}lkopf}.} \bibinfo{year}{2005}\natexlab{}.
\newblock \showarticletitle{Measuring statistical dependence with Hilbert-Schmidt norms}. In \bibinfo{booktitle}{\emph{International conference on algorithmic learning theory}}. Springer, \bibinfo{pages}{63--77}.
\newblock
\bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{Guo and Wei}{Guo and Wei}{2022}]%
{guo2022clenshaw}
\bibfield{author}{\bibinfo{person}{Yuhe Guo} {and} \bibinfo{person}{Zhewei Wei}.} \bibinfo{year}{2022}\natexlab{}.
\newblock \showarticletitle{Clenshaw Graph Neural Networks}.
\newblock \bibinfo{journal}{\emph{arXiv preprint arXiv:2210.16508}} (\bibinfo{year}{2022}).
\newblock
\bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{Hammer and Bastian}{Hammer and Bastian}{2020}]%
{hammer2020wetlands}
\bibfield{author}{\bibinfo{person}{Donald~A Hammer} {and} \bibinfo{person}{Robert~K Bastian}.} \bibinfo{year}{2020}\natexlab{}.
\newblock \showarticletitle{Wetlands ecosystems: natural water purifiers?}
\newblock In \bibinfo{booktitle}{\emph{Constructed wetlands for wastewater treatment}}. \bibinfo{publisher}{CRC Press}, \bibinfo{pages}{5--19}.
\newblock
\bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{Huang, Shen, Hou, and Cheng}{Huang et~al\mbox{.}}{2019}]%
{huang2019signed}
\bibfield{author}{\bibinfo{person}{Junjie Huang}, \bibinfo{person}{Huawei Shen}, \bibinfo{person}{Liang Hou}, {and} \bibinfo{person}{Xueqi Cheng}.} \bibinfo{year}{2019}\natexlab{}.
\newblock \showarticletitle{Signed graph attention networks}. In \bibinfo{booktitle}{\emph{International Conference on Artificial Neural Networks}}. Springer, \bibinfo{pages}{566--577}.
\newblock
\bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{Hwang, Kim, Hong, and Kim}{Hwang et~al\mbox{.}}{2020}]%
{hwang2020variational}
\bibfield{author}{\bibinfo{person}{HyeongJoo Hwang}, \bibinfo{person}{Geon-Hyeong Kim}, \bibinfo{person}{Seunghoon Hong}, {and} \bibinfo{person}{Kee-Eung Kim}.} \bibinfo{year}{2020}\natexlab{}.
\newblock \showarticletitle{Variational interaction information maximization for cross-domain disentanglement}.
\newblock \bibinfo{journal}{\emph{Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems}} \bibinfo{volume}{33} (\bibinfo{year}{2020}), \bibinfo{pages}{22479--22491}.
\newblock
\bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{Kipf and Welling}{Kipf and Welling}{2016}]%
{kipf2016semi}
\bibfield{author}{\bibinfo{person}{Thomas~N Kipf} {and} \bibinfo{person}{Max Welling}.} \bibinfo{year}{2016}\natexlab{}.
\newblock \showarticletitle{Semi-supervised classification with graph convolutional networks}.
\newblock \bibinfo{journal}{\emph{arXiv preprint arXiv:1609.02907}} (\bibinfo{year}{2016}).
\newblock
\bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{Krishnan, Das, Bendre, Yang, and Sundaram}{Krishnan et~al\mbox{.}}{2020}]%
{krishnan2020transfer}
\bibfield{author}{\bibinfo{person}{Adit Krishnan}, \bibinfo{person}{Mahashweta Das}, \bibinfo{person}{Mangesh Bendre}, \bibinfo{person}{Hao Yang}, {and} \bibinfo{person}{Hari Sundaram}.} \bibinfo{year}{2020}\natexlab{}.
\newblock \showarticletitle{Transfer Learning via Contextual Invariants for One-to-Many Cross-Domain Recommendation}. In \bibinfo{booktitle}{\emph{Proceedings of the 43rd International ACM SIGIR Conference on Research and Development in Information Retrieval}}. \bibinfo{pages}{1081--1090}.
\newblock
\bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{Li, Zhu, Cheng, Shan, Luo, Li, and Qian}{Li et~al\mbox{.}}{2022}]%
{li2022finding}
\bibfield{author}{\bibinfo{person}{Xiang Li}, \bibinfo{person}{Renyu Zhu}, \bibinfo{person}{Yao Cheng}, \bibinfo{person}{Caihua Shan}, \bibinfo{person}{Siqiang Luo}, \bibinfo{person}{Dongsheng Li}, {and} \bibinfo{person}{Weining Qian}.} \bibinfo{year}{2022}\natexlab{}.
\newblock \showarticletitle{Finding Global Homophily in Graph Neural Networks When Meeting Heterophily}.
\newblock \bibinfo{journal}{\emph{arXiv preprint arXiv:2205.07308}} (\bibinfo{year}{2022}).
\newblock
\bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{Li, Tang, Li, and He}{Li et~al\mbox{.}}{2019}]%
{li2019learning}
\bibfield{author}{\bibinfo{person}{Zejian Li}, \bibinfo{person}{Yongchuan Tang}, \bibinfo{person}{Wei Li}, {and} \bibinfo{person}{Yongxing He}.} \bibinfo{year}{2019}\natexlab{}.
\newblock \showarticletitle{Learning disentangled representation with pairwise independence}. In \bibinfo{booktitle}{\emph{Proceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence}}, Vol.~\bibinfo{volume}{33}. \bibinfo{pages}{4245--4252}.
\newblock
\bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{Lyon and Lyon}{Lyon and Lyon}{1993}]%
{lyon1993wetland}
\bibfield{author}{\bibinfo{person}{John~Grimson Lyon} {and} \bibinfo{person}{Lynn~Krise Lyon}.} \bibinfo{year}{1993}\natexlab{}.
\newblock \showarticletitle{Wetland Identification and Delineation}.
\newblock \bibinfo{journal}{\emph{Boca Raton, Florida}} (\bibinfo{year}{1993}).
\newblock
\bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{Mahdavi, Salehi, Granger, Amani, Brisco, and Huang}{Mahdavi et~al\mbox{.}}{2018}]%
{mahdavi2018remote}
\bibfield{author}{\bibinfo{person}{Sahel Mahdavi}, \bibinfo{person}{Bahram Salehi}, \bibinfo{person}{Jean Granger}, \bibinfo{person}{Meisam Amani}, \bibinfo{person}{Brian Brisco}, {and} \bibinfo{person}{Weimin Huang}.} \bibinfo{year}{2018}\natexlab{}.
\newblock \showarticletitle{Remote sensing for wetland classification: A comprehensive review}.
\newblock \bibinfo{journal}{\emph{GIScience \& remote sensing}} \bibinfo{volume}{55}, \bibinfo{number}{5} (\bibinfo{year}{2018}), \bibinfo{pages}{623--658}.
\newblock
\bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{Maitra, Bhattacharya, and Parui}{Maitra et~al\mbox{.}}{2015}]%
{maitra2015cnn}
\bibfield{author}{\bibinfo{person}{Durjoy~Sen Maitra}, \bibinfo{person}{Ujjwal Bhattacharya}, {and} \bibinfo{person}{Swapan~K Parui}.} \bibinfo{year}{2015}\natexlab{}.
\newblock \showarticletitle{CNN based common approach to handwritten character recognition of multiple scripts}. In \bibinfo{booktitle}{\emph{2015 13th International Conference on Document Analysis and Recognition (ICDAR)}}. IEEE, \bibinfo{pages}{1021--1025}.
\newblock
\bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{Man, Shen, Jin, and Cheng}{Man et~al\mbox{.}}{2017}]%
{man2017cross}
\bibfield{author}{\bibinfo{person}{Tong Man}, \bibinfo{person}{Huawei Shen}, \bibinfo{person}{Xiaolong Jin}, {and} \bibinfo{person}{Xueqi Cheng}.} \bibinfo{year}{2017}\natexlab{}.
\newblock \showarticletitle{Cross-Domain Recommendation: An Embedding and Mapping Approach.}. In \bibinfo{booktitle}{\emph{IJCAI}}, Vol.~\bibinfo{volume}{17}. \bibinfo{pages}{2464--2470}.
\newblock
\bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{Mausbach}{Mausbach}{1994}]%
{mausbach1994classification}
\bibfield{author}{\bibinfo{person}{MJ Mausbach}.} \bibinfo{year}{1994}\natexlab{}.
\newblock \showarticletitle{Classification of Wetland Soils for Wetland Identification 1}.
\newblock \bibinfo{journal}{\emph{Soil survey horizons}} \bibinfo{volume}{35}, \bibinfo{number}{1} (\bibinfo{year}{1994}), \bibinfo{pages}{17--25}.
\newblock
\bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{Megonigal, Patrick~Jr, and Faulkner}{Megonigal et~al\mbox{.}}{1993}]%
{megonigal1993wetland}
\bibfield{author}{\bibinfo{person}{J~Patrick Megonigal}, \bibinfo{person}{WH Patrick~Jr}, {and} \bibinfo{person}{SP Faulkner}.} \bibinfo{year}{1993}\natexlab{}.
\newblock \showarticletitle{Wetland identification in seasonally flooded forest soils: soil morphology and redox dynamics}.
\newblock \bibinfo{journal}{\emph{Soil Science Society of America Journal}} \bibinfo{volume}{57}, \bibinfo{number}{1} (\bibinfo{year}{1993}), \bibinfo{pages}{140--149}.
\newblock
\bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{Nema, Karatzoglou, and Radlinski}{Nema et~al\mbox{.}}{2021}]%
{nema2021disentangling}
\bibfield{author}{\bibinfo{person}{Preksha Nema}, \bibinfo{person}{Alexandros Karatzoglou}, {and} \bibinfo{person}{Filip Radlinski}.} \bibinfo{year}{2021}\natexlab{}.
\newblock \showarticletitle{Disentangling Preference Representations for Recommendation Critiquing with {\ss}-VAE}. In \bibinfo{booktitle}{\emph{Proceedings of the 30th ACM International Conference on Information \& Knowledge Management}}. \bibinfo{pages}{1356--1365}.
\newblock
\bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{Neumann, Garnett, Bauckhage, and Kersting}{Neumann et~al\mbox{.}}{2016}]%
{neumann2016propagation}
\bibfield{author}{\bibinfo{person}{Marion Neumann}, \bibinfo{person}{Roman Garnett}, \bibinfo{person}{Christian Bauckhage}, {and} \bibinfo{person}{Kristian Kersting}.} \bibinfo{year}{2016}\natexlab{}.
\newblock \showarticletitle{Propagation kernels: efficient graph kernels from propagated information}.
\newblock \bibinfo{journal}{\emph{Machine learning}} \bibinfo{volume}{102} (\bibinfo{year}{2016}), \bibinfo{pages}{209--245}.
\newblock
\bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{O'Neil, Goodall, Behl, and Saby}{O'Neil et~al\mbox{.}}{2020}]%
{o2020deep}
\bibfield{author}{\bibinfo{person}{Gina~L O'Neil}, \bibinfo{person}{Jonathan~L Goodall}, \bibinfo{person}{Madhur Behl}, {and} \bibinfo{person}{Linnea Saby}.} \bibinfo{year}{2020}\natexlab{}.
\newblock \showarticletitle{Deep learning using physically-informed input data for wetland identification}.
\newblock \bibinfo{journal}{\emph{Environmental modelling \& software}} \bibinfo{volume}{126} (\bibinfo{year}{2020}), \bibinfo{pages}{104665}.
\newblock
\bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{Pei, Wei, Chang, Lei, and Yang}{Pei et~al\mbox{.}}{2020}]%
{pei2020geom}
\bibfield{author}{\bibinfo{person}{Hongbin Pei}, \bibinfo{person}{Bingzhe Wei}, \bibinfo{person}{Kevin Chen-Chuan Chang}, \bibinfo{person}{Yu Lei}, {and} \bibinfo{person}{Bo Yang}.} \bibinfo{year}{2020}\natexlab{}.
\newblock \showarticletitle{Geom-gcn: Geometric graph convolutional networks}.
\newblock \bibinfo{journal}{\emph{arXiv preprint arXiv:2002.05287}} (\bibinfo{year}{2020}).
\newblock
\bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{Peng, Huang, Sun, and Saenko}{Peng et~al\mbox{.}}{2019}]%
{peng2019domain}
\bibfield{author}{\bibinfo{person}{Xingchao Peng}, \bibinfo{person}{Zijun Huang}, \bibinfo{person}{Ximeng Sun}, {and} \bibinfo{person}{Kate Saenko}.} \bibinfo{year}{2019}\natexlab{}.
\newblock \showarticletitle{Domain agnostic learning with disentangled representations}. In \bibinfo{booktitle}{\emph{International Conference on Machine Learning}}. PMLR, \bibinfo{pages}{5102--5112}.
\newblock
\bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{Richardson}{Richardson}{2001}]%
{richardson2001wetland}
\bibfield{author}{\bibinfo{person}{Jimmie~Larry Richardson}.} \bibinfo{year}{2001}\natexlab{}.
\newblock \bibinfo{booktitle}{\emph{Wetland soils}}.
\newblock
\bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{Sun, Deng, Yang, Wang, Xu, Huang, Cao, Wang, and Chen}{Sun et~al\mbox{.}}{2022}]%
{ijcai2022p310}
\bibfield{author}{\bibinfo{person}{Yifei Sun}, \bibinfo{person}{Haoran Deng}, \bibinfo{person}{Yang Yang}, \bibinfo{person}{Chunping Wang}, \bibinfo{person}{Jiarong Xu}, \bibinfo{person}{Renhong Huang}, \bibinfo{person}{Linfeng Cao}, \bibinfo{person}{Yang Wang}, {and} \bibinfo{person}{Lei Chen}.} \bibinfo{year}{2022}\natexlab{}.
\newblock \showarticletitle{Beyond Homophily: Structure-aware Path Aggregation Graph Neural Network}. In \bibinfo{booktitle}{\emph{Proceedings of the Thirty-First International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, {IJCAI-22}}}, \bibfield{editor}{\bibinfo{person}{Lud~De Raedt}} (Ed.). \bibinfo{publisher}{International Joint Conferences on Artificial Intelligence Organization}, \bibinfo{pages}{2233--2240}.
\newblock
\urldef\tempurl%
\url{https://doi.org/10.24963/ijcai.2022/310}
\showDOI{\tempurl}
\newblock
\shownote{Main Track.}
\bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{Tiner}{Tiner}{1991}]%
{tiner1991concept}
\bibfield{author}{\bibinfo{person}{Ralph~W Tiner}.} \bibinfo{year}{1991}\natexlab{}.
\newblock \showarticletitle{The concept of a hydrophyte for wetland identification}.
\newblock \bibinfo{journal}{\emph{Bioscience}} \bibinfo{volume}{41}, \bibinfo{number}{4} (\bibinfo{year}{1991}), \bibinfo{pages}{236--247}.
\newblock
\bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{Tiner}{Tiner}{2016}]%
{tiner2016wetland}
\bibfield{author}{\bibinfo{person}{Ralph~W Tiner}.} \bibinfo{year}{2016}\natexlab{}.
\newblock \bibinfo{booktitle}{\emph{Wetland indicators: A guide to wetland formation, identification, delineation, classification, and mapping}}.
\newblock \bibinfo{publisher}{CRC press}.
\newblock
\bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{Velickovic, Cucurull, Casanova, Romero, Lio, and Bengio}{Velickovic et~al\mbox{.}}{2017}]%
{velickovic2017graph}
\bibfield{author}{\bibinfo{person}{Petar Velickovic}, \bibinfo{person}{Guillem Cucurull}, \bibinfo{person}{Arantxa Casanova}, \bibinfo{person}{Adriana Romero}, \bibinfo{person}{Pietro Lio}, {and} \bibinfo{person}{Yoshua Bengio}.} \bibinfo{year}{2017}\natexlab{}.
\newblock \showarticletitle{Graph attention networks}.
\newblock \bibinfo{journal}{\emph{stat}} \bibinfo{volume}{1050} (\bibinfo{year}{2017}), \bibinfo{pages}{20}.
\newblock
\bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{Wang, Jin, Wang, He, and Huang}{Wang et~al\mbox{.}}{2022}]%
{wang2022powerfulb}
\bibfield{author}{\bibinfo{person}{Tao Wang}, \bibinfo{person}{Di Jin}, \bibinfo{person}{Rui Wang}, \bibinfo{person}{Dongxiao He}, {and} \bibinfo{person}{Yuxiao Huang}.} \bibinfo{year}{2022}\natexlab{}.
\newblock \showarticletitle{Powerful graph convolutional networks with adaptive propagation mechanism for homophily and heterophily}. In \bibinfo{booktitle}{\emph{Proceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence}}, Vol.~\bibinfo{volume}{36}. \bibinfo{pages}{4210--4218}.
\newblock
\bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{Wang, Peng, Wang, Philip, Fu, and Hong}{Wang et~al\mbox{.}}{2018}]%
{wang2018cross}
\bibfield{author}{\bibinfo{person}{Xinghua Wang}, \bibinfo{person}{Zhaohui Peng}, \bibinfo{person}{Senzhang Wang}, \bibinfo{person}{S~Yu Philip}, \bibinfo{person}{Wenjing Fu}, {and} \bibinfo{person}{Xiaoguang Hong}.} \bibinfo{year}{2018}\natexlab{}.
\newblock \showarticletitle{Cross-domain recommendation for cold-start users via neighborhood based feature mapping}. In \bibinfo{booktitle}{\emph{International conference on database systems for advanced applications}}. Springer, \bibinfo{pages}{158--165}.
\newblock
\bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{Xu and Cai}{Xu and Cai}{2023}]%
{xu2023decoupled}
\bibfield{author}{\bibinfo{person}{Jingyun Xu} {and} \bibinfo{person}{Yi Cai}.} \bibinfo{year}{2023}\natexlab{}.
\newblock \showarticletitle{Decoupled Hyperbolic Graph Attention Network for Cross-domain Named Entity Recognition}. In \bibinfo{booktitle}{\emph{Proceedings of the 46th International ACM SIGIR Conference on Research and Development in Information Retrieval}}. \bibinfo{pages}{591--600}.
\newblock
\bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{Yuan, Yao, and Benatallah}{Yuan et~al\mbox{.}}{2019}]%
{yuan2019darec}
\bibfield{author}{\bibinfo{person}{Feng Yuan}, \bibinfo{person}{Lina Yao}, {and} \bibinfo{person}{Boualem Benatallah}.} \bibinfo{year}{2019}\natexlab{}.
\newblock \showarticletitle{DARec: deep domain adaptation for cross-domain recommendation via transferring rating patterns}.
\newblock \bibinfo{journal}{\emph{arXiv preprint arXiv:1905.10760}} (\bibinfo{year}{2019}).
\newblock
\bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{Zhao, Li, Xiao, Deng, and Sun}{Zhao et~al\mbox{.}}{2020}]%
{zhao2020catn}
\bibfield{author}{\bibinfo{person}{Cheng Zhao}, \bibinfo{person}{Chenliang Li}, \bibinfo{person}{Rong Xiao}, \bibinfo{person}{Hongbo Deng}, {and} \bibinfo{person}{Aixin Sun}.} \bibinfo{year}{2020}\natexlab{}.
\newblock \showarticletitle{CATN: Cross-Domain Recommendation for Cold-Start Users via Aspect Transfer Network}.
\newblock \bibinfo{journal}{\emph{arXiv preprint arXiv:2005.10549}} (\bibinfo{year}{2020}).
\newblock
\bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{Zhao, Kang, Song, She, Wang, and Tay}{Zhao et~al\mbox{.}}{2023}]%
{zhao2023graph}
\bibfield{author}{\bibinfo{person}{Kai Zhao}, \bibinfo{person}{Qiyu Kang}, \bibinfo{person}{Yang Song}, \bibinfo{person}{Rui She}, \bibinfo{person}{Sijie Wang}, {and} \bibinfo{person}{Wee~Peng Tay}.} \bibinfo{year}{2023}\natexlab{}.
\newblock \showarticletitle{Graph neural convection-diffusion with heterophily}.
\newblock \bibinfo{journal}{\emph{arXiv preprint arXiv:2305.16780}} (\bibinfo{year}{2023}).
\newblock
\bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{Zheng, Zhang, Chen, Zhang, Zhou, and Pan}{Zheng et~al\mbox{.}}{2023}]%
{zheng2023auto}
\bibfield{author}{\bibinfo{person}{Xin Zheng}, \bibinfo{person}{Miao Zhang}, \bibinfo{person}{Chunyang Chen}, \bibinfo{person}{Qin Zhang}, \bibinfo{person}{Chuan Zhou}, {and} \bibinfo{person}{Shirui Pan}.} \bibinfo{year}{2023}\natexlab{}.
\newblock \showarticletitle{Auto-heg: Automated graph neural network on heterophilic graphs}.
\newblock \bibinfo{journal}{\emph{arXiv preprint arXiv:2302.12357}} (\bibinfo{year}{2023}).
\newblock
\bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{Zhu, Wang, Chen, Zhou, Li, and Liu}{Zhu et~al\mbox{.}}{2021b}]%
{zhu2021cross}
\bibfield{author}{\bibinfo{person}{Feng Zhu}, \bibinfo{person}{Yan Wang}, \bibinfo{person}{Chaochao Chen}, \bibinfo{person}{Jun Zhou}, \bibinfo{person}{Longfei Li}, {and} \bibinfo{person}{Guanfeng Liu}.} \bibinfo{year}{2021}\natexlab{b}.
\newblock \showarticletitle{Cross-domain recommendation: challenges, progress, and prospects}.
\newblock \bibinfo{journal}{\emph{arXiv preprint arXiv:2103.01696}} (\bibinfo{year}{2021}).
\newblock
\bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{Zhu, Rossi, Rao, Mai, Lipka, Ahmed, and Koutra}{Zhu et~al\mbox{.}}{2021a}]%
{zhu2021graph}
\bibfield{author}{\bibinfo{person}{Jiong Zhu}, \bibinfo{person}{Ryan~A Rossi}, \bibinfo{person}{Anup Rao}, \bibinfo{person}{Tung Mai}, \bibinfo{person}{Nedim Lipka}, \bibinfo{person}{Nesreen~K Ahmed}, {and} \bibinfo{person}{Danai Koutra}.} \bibinfo{year}{2021}\natexlab{a}.
\newblock \showarticletitle{Graph neural networks with heterophily}. In \bibinfo{booktitle}{\emph{Proceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence}}, Vol.~\bibinfo{volume}{35}. \bibinfo{pages}{11168--11176}.
\newblock
\bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{Zhu, Yan, Zhao, Heimann, Akoglu, and Koutra}{Zhu et~al\mbox{.}}{2020}]%
{zhu2020beyond}
\bibfield{author}{\bibinfo{person}{Jiong Zhu}, \bibinfo{person}{Yujun Yan}, \bibinfo{person}{Lingxiao Zhao}, \bibinfo{person}{Mark Heimann}, \bibinfo{person}{Leman Akoglu}, {and} \bibinfo{person}{Danai Koutra}.} \bibinfo{year}{2020}\natexlab{}.
\newblock \showarticletitle{Beyond homophily in graph neural networks: Current limitations and effective designs}.
\newblock \bibinfo{journal}{\emph{Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems}} \bibinfo{volume}{33} (\bibinfo{year}{2020}), \bibinfo{pages}{7793--7804}.
\newblock
\end{thebibliography}