OGB
ogbl-ppa
Structure
1Graphs
576,289Nodes
30,326,273Edges
58Node Feature Dim
Coverage
89Results
1Variants
21Papers
- Using Random Noise Equivariantly to Boost Graph Neural Networks Universally Using Random Noise Equivariantly to Boost Graph Neural Networks Universally
- NeurIPS 2024: PageRank Bandits for Link Prediction PageRank Bandits for Link Prediction NeurIPS 2024
- TMLR 2024: PROXI: Challenging the GNNs for Link Prediction PROXI: Challenging the GNNs for Link Prediction TMLR 2024
- Link Prediction with Untrained Message Passing Layers Link Prediction with Untrained Message Passing Layers
- KDD 2023: LPFormer: An Adaptive Graph Transformer for Link Prediction LPFormer: An Adaptive Graph Transformer for Link Prediction KDD 2023
- Efficient Link Prediction via GNN Layers Induced by Negative Sampling Efficient Link Prediction via GNN Layers Induced by Negative Sampling
- ICLR 2023: Revisiting Link Prediction: a data perspective Revisiting Link Prediction: a data perspective ICLR 2023
- JMLR 2023: Improving Graph Neural Networks on Multi-node Tasks with the Labeling Trick Improving Graph Neural Networks on Multi-node Tasks with the Labeling Trick JMLR 2023
- NeurIPS 2023: Graph Mixture of Experts: Learning on Large-Scale Graphs with Explicit Diversity Modeling Graph Mixture of Experts: Learning on Large-Scale Graphs with Explicit Diversity Modeling NeurIPS 2023
- Asymmetric Learning for Graph Neural Network based Link Prediction Asymmetric Learning for Graph Neural Network based Link Prediction
- Simplifying Subgraph Representation Learning for Scalable Link Prediction Simplifying Subgraph Representation Learning for Scalable Link Prediction
- Bring Your Own View: Graph Neural Networks for Link Prediction with Personalized Subgraph Selection Bring Your Own View: Graph Neural Networks for Link Prediction with Personalized Subgraph Selection
- NeurIPS 2022: Geodesic Graph Neural Network for Efficient Graph Representation Learning Geodesic Graph Neural Network for Efficient Graph Representation Learning NeurIPS 2022
- ICLR 2022: Graph Neural Networks for Link Prediction with Subgraph Sketching Graph Neural Networks for Link Prediction with Subgraph Sketching ICLR 2022
- NeurIPS 2022: Neo-GNNs: Neighborhood Overlap-aware Graph Neural Networks for Link Prediction Neo-GNNs: Neighborhood Overlap-aware Graph Neural Networks for Link Prediction NeurIPS 2022
- MGAE: Masked Autoencoders for Self-Supervised Learning on Graphs MGAE: Masked Autoencoders for Self-Supervised Learning on Graphs
- Pairwise Learning for Neural Link Prediction Pairwise Learning for Neural Link Prediction
- Adaptive Graph Diffusion Networks Adaptive Graph Diffusion Networks
- NeurIPS 2020: Labeling Trick: A Theory of Using Graph Neural Networks for Multi-Node Representation Learning Labeling Trick: A Theory of Using Graph Neural Networks for Multi-Node Representation Learning NeurIPS 2020
- Formatting Instructions for ICLR 2021 Conference Submissions Formatting Instructions for ICLR 2021 Conference Submissions
- NeurIPS 2020: OGB OGB NeurIPS 2020
Link prediction Predict held-out biologically meaningful protein-protein association edges. Each node has only a 58-dimensional one-hot species indicator in the standard artifact. Evaluated by Hits@100.
Dataset details
Task
Predict held-out biologically meaningful protein-protein association edges. Each positive is ranked against three million sampled negative edges and evaluated by Hits@100.
Data
The undirected graph contains 576,289 proteins from 58 species and STRING associations arising from physical interaction, co-expression, homology, genomic neighborhood, and other evidence.
Features
Each node has only a 58-dimensional one-hot species indicator in the standard artifact. The released training graph contains training edges but excludes validation and test associations.
Splits and evaluation
The biological-throughput split uses high-throughput experimental or computationally derived associations for training and reserves resource-intensive low-throughput experimental associations for validation and test.
Quirks and pitfalls
STRING associations are broader than direct physical binding. Randomly sampled absent pairs may include unknown biology rather than confirmed negatives, while Hits@100 against millions of candidates is much stricter than ROC-AUC. A random edge split would discard the intended evidence-quality shift.
Sources
SOTA Progression
new SOTA
matches SOTA at that time
other proposed result
other baseline result
Leaderboard
| # | Model | Hits@100 ↑ | Hits@50 | Paper |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | OGB Leader | 0.6524
±
0.0150 | — | |
| 2 | PRB | 0.6347
±
0.0175 | — | |
| 3 | LPFormer | 0.6332
±
0.0063 | — | |
| 4 | NCNC | 0.6264
±
0.0079 | — | |
| 5 | NCN | 0.6263
±
0.0115 | — | |
| 6 | NCNC (GIN) | 0.5947
±
0.0160 | — | |
| 7 | YinYanGNN | 0.5464
±
0.0049 | — | |
| 8 | SUREL | 0.5432
±
0.0044 | — | |
| 9 | RA | 0.5324
±
0.0000 | — | |
| 10 | PROXI | 0.5036
±
0.0076 | — | |
| 11 | AML-R (G) | 0.5030
±
0.0061 | — | |
| 12 | SEAL-PS2 | 0.5025
±
0.0233 | — | |
| 13 | AML | 0.5023
±
0.0078 | — | |
| 14 | SAGE | 0.5013
±
0.0055 | — | |
| 15 | BUDDY | 0.4985
±
0.0020 | — | |
| 16 | GAT | 0.4971
±
0.0048 | — | |
| 17 | RA | 0.4933
±
0.0000 | — | |
| 18 | Resource Allocation | 0.4933
±
0.0000 | — | |
| 19 | Neo-GNN | 0.4913
±
0.0060 | — | |
| 20 | SEAL | 0.4880
±
0.0316 | — | |
| 21 | NeoGNN | 0.4845
±
0.0101 | — | |
| 22 | SMLP | 0.4742
±
0.0137 | — | |
| 23 | SNCNC (SGCN) | 0.4602
±
0.0119 | — | |
| 24 | ML | 0.4600
±
0.0000 | — | |
| 25 | MLP | 0.4600
±
0.0000 | — | |
| 26 | GDGNN-Vert | 0.4592
±
0.0214 | — | |
| 27 | GDGNN | 0.4592
±
0.0214 | — | |
| 28 | DE-GNN | 0.4570
±
0.0346 | — | |
| 29 | GCN+DRNL | 0.4524
±
0.0395 | — | |
| 30 | ENGNN | 0.4497
±
0.0074 | — | |
| 31 | ZO-OS | 0.4327
±
0.0119 | — | |
| 32 | PoS+ | 0.4242
±
0.0180 | — | |
| 33 | AGDN | 0.4123
±
0.0159 | — | |
| 34 | SAGE | 0.4102
±
0.0194 | — | |
| 35 | NMPNN | 0.3990
±
0.0552 | — | |
| 36 | ZO | 0.3775
±
0.0342 | — | |
| 37 | GCN+DE | 0.3648
±
0.0378 | — | |
| 38 | ZO-S | 0.3604
±
0.0450 | — | |
| 39 | SEAL-RS | 0.3568
±
0.0521 | — | |
| 40 | LRGA+GCN | 0.3420
±
0.0160 | — | |
| 41 | AA | 0.3245
±
0.0000 | — | |
| 42 | Adamic Adar | 0.3245
±
0.0000 | — | |
| 43 | PLNLP | 0.3238
±
0.0258 | — | |
| 44 | MF | 0.3230
±
0.0090 | — | |
| 45 | Matrix Factorization | 0.3229
±
0.0094 | — | |
| 46 | MatrixFactorization | 0.3229
±
0.0094 | — | |
| 47 | GCN | 0.2957
±
0.0290 | — | |
| 48 | DeepWalk | 0.2890
±
0.0150 | — | |
| 49 | GDGNN-Hor | 0.2879
±
0.0380 | — | |
| 50 | DistMult | 0.2861
±
0.0147 | — |
SOTA performance
set a new SOTA at the time
matched the SOTA at the time