Graph U-Nets
Abstract
We consider the problem of representation learning for graph data. Given images are special cases of graphs with nodes lie on 2D lattices, graph embedding tasks have a natural correspondence with image pixel-wise prediction tasks such as segmentation. While encoder-decoder architectures like U-Nets have been successfully applied to image pixel-wise prediction tasks, similar methods are lacking for graph data. This is because pooling and up-sampling operations are not natural on graph data. To address these challenges, we propose novel graph pooling and unpooling operations. The gPool layer adaptively selects some nodes to form a smaller graph based on their scalar projection values. We further propose the gUnpool layer as the inverse operation of the gPool layer. Based on our proposed methods, we develop an encoder-decoder model, known as the graph U-Nets. Experimental results on node classification and graph classification tasks demonstrate that our methods achieve consistently better performance than previous models. Along this direction, we extend our methods by integrating attention mechanisms. Based on attention operators, we proposed attention-based pooling and unpooling layers, which can better capture graph topology information. The empirical results on graph classification tasks demonstrate the promising capability of our methods.
Benchmark Results
Tested on 5 datasets 4 baseline values reported too low
Tables show presented results in global context (best 3 papers + GCN + MLP).
Classic
| # | Model | Accuracy ↑ | Paper |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | GraphSAGE+CNA | 0.9418
±0.0033 | |
| 2 | GCN+CNA | 0.9366
±0.0048 | |
| 3 | TransformerConv | 0.9350
±0.0058 | |
| 21 | GCN | 0.9004 best reported | best at pub: SplineCNN: Fast Geometric Deep Learning with Continuous B-Spline Kernels (2017) best today: Understanding Heterophily for Graph Neural Networks (ICML 2024) |
| 39 | SAGE | 0.8911
±0.0012 | |
| 44 | GAT | 0.8897
±0.0014 best reported | best at pub: Topology Adaptive Graph Convolutional Networks (2017) |
| 261 | g-U-Nets | 0.8440
±0.0060 | This paper |
| 435 | DeepWalk | 0.8290 best reported | best at pub: Geometric deep learning on graphs and manifolds using mixture model CNNs (2016) best today: Graph Representation Learning: A Survey (2019) |
| 590 | Chebyshev | 0.8120 | This paper |
| 724 | MLP | 0.7768 | |
| 762 | Planetoid | 0.7570 | This paper |
| # | Model | Accuracy ↑ | Paper |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | CNA | 0.9575
±0.0058 | |
| 2 | IS-GIB | 0.9390
±0.0187 | |
| 3 | EERM | 0.9112
±0.0145 | |
| 35 | GAT | 0.8080
±0.0026 best reported | best at pub: Topology Adaptive Graph Convolutional Networks (2017) best today: Feature Expansion for Graph Neural Networks (ICML 2023) |
| 44 | GCN | 0.8033
±0.0088 best reported | best at pub: Fast Graph Representation Learning with PyTorch Geometric (ICLR 2019) |
| 61 | GraphSAGE | 0.7923
±0.0053 | |
| 306 | g-U-Nets | 0.7320
±0.0050 | This paper |
| 350 | MLP | 0.7289
±0.0010 | |
| 617 | Chebyshev | 0.7010
±0.0080 best reported | best at pub: Graph Neural Networks With Convolutional ARMA Filters (2019) Difference within reported uncertainty; not counted as underperformance. |
| 692 | DeepWalk | 0.6785
±0.0079 best reported | best at pub: Topology Adaptive Graph Convolutional Networks (2017) best today: Decoupled Self-supervised Learning for Non-Homophilou Graphs (2022) |
| 782 | Planetoid | 0.6470 | This paper |
| # | Model | Accuracy ↑ | Paper |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | LGTL | 0.9518
±0.0011 | |
| 2 | MixHop (LO) | 0.9513
±0.0038 | |
| 3 | GraphSAGE (LO) | 0.9511
±0.0036 | |
| 18 | GCN | 0.9296
±0.0015 best reported | best at pub: Topology Adaptive Graph Convolutional Networks (2017) |
| 20 | GAT | 0.9233
±0.0018 best reported | best at pub: Topology Adaptive Graph Convolutional Networks (2017) |
| 116 | SAGE | 0.8881
±0.0015 | |
| 210 | MLP | 0.8690
±0.0074 | |
| 223 | DeepWalk | 0.8652
±0.0012 best reported | |
| 494 | g-U-Nets | 0.7960
±0.0020 | This paper |
| 727 | Planetoid | 0.7720 | This paper |
| 807 | Chebyshev | 0.7440 | This paper |
TU Dortmund
| # | Model | Accuracy ↑ | Paper |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | WL-MLP | 0.9792 | |
| 2 | MSH-GNN | 0.9640
±0.0070 | |
| 3 | CoCN | 0.8722
±0.0013 | |
| 23 | GCN | 0.8260
±0.0220 | |
| 34 | DiffPool-Det | 0.8213 | This paper |
| 33 | DiffPool | 0.8213
±0.0043 best reported | best at pub: Fast Graph Representation Learning with PyTorch Geometric (ICLR 2019) best today: Scalable Graph Compressed Convolutions (2024) |
| 151 | MLP | 0.7920
±0.0240 | |
| 191 | DGCNN | 0.7376 | prev best: How Powerful are Graph Neural Networks? (ICLR 2018) best today: Explainable Graph Representation Learning via Graph Pattern Analysis (IJCAI 2025) |
| 192 | g-U-Nets | 0.7756 | This paper |
| 237 | DiffPool-NoLP | 0.7558 | This paper |
| 281 | PSCN | 0.7260 | This paper |
| # | Model | Accuracy ↑ | Paper |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | GC-GNN (GCN) | 0.9210
±0.0810 | |
| 2 | SUGAR | 0.8403
±0.0133 | |
| 3 | Ortho-g-U-Nets | 0.8387 | |
| 4 | g-U-Nets | 0.8300 best reported | best today: Orthogonal Graph Neural Networks (AAAI 2021) |
| 15 | SAGE | 0.8088
±0.0233 | |
| 18 | DiffPool | 0.8064 | This paper |
| 24 | DiffPool-NoLP | 0.7998 | This paper |
| 37 | DGCNN | 0.7937 | This paper |
| 101 | PSCN | 0.7712
±0.0241 best reported | best at pub: Dynamic Edge-Conditioned Filters in Convolutional Neural Networks on Graphs (2017) best today: Semi-Supervised Hierarchical Graph Classification (2022) |
| 117 | DiffPool-Det | 0.7615
±0.0105 best reported | best today: ICEPool: Enhancing Graph Pooling Networks with Inter-cluster Connectivity (2025) Difference within reported uncertainty; not counted as underperformance. |
