Edge Contraction Pooling for Graph Neural Networks

Frederik Diehl

Main figure for Edge Contraction Pooling for Graph Neural Networks

Abstract

research has concentrated on improving convolutional layers, with little attention paid to developing graph pooling layers. Yet pooling layers can enable to reason over abstracted groups of nodes instead of single nodes. To close this gap, we propose a graph pooling layer relying on the notion of edge contraction: EdgePool learns a localized and sparse hard pooling transform. We show that EdgePool outperforms alternative pooling methods, can be easily integrated into most models, and improves performance on both node and graph classification.

Proposed method: EdgePool

Benchmark Results

Tested on 1 dataset 3 baseline values reported too low

Tables show presented results in global context (best 3 papers + GCN + MLP).

TU Dortmund

#ModelAccuracy ↑Paper
1
WL-MLP
0.9792
2
MSH-GNN
0.9640 ±0.0070
3
CoCN
0.8722 ±0.0013
23
GCN
actual #23 vs paper #288 265 places worse
0.8260 ±0.0220
best reported
actual #23 vs paper #288 265 places worse
paper 0.7150 ±0.0200
paper 0.7150 ±0.0200 Δ at pub 0.0910 Δ today 0.1110
30
GIN
actual #30 vs paper #260 230 places worse
0.8220 ±0.0210
best reported
actual #30 vs paper #260 230 places worse
paper 0.7420 ±0.0180
paper 0.7420 ±0.0180 Δ today 0.0800
33
DiffPool
actual #33 vs paper #300 267 places worse
0.8213 ±0.0043
best reported
actual #33 vs paper #300 267 places worse
paper 0.7010 ±0.0150
paper 0.7010 ±0.0150 Δ at pub 0.0880 Δ today 0.1203
39
SAGPool
actual #39 vs paper #324 285 places worse
0.8176 ±0.0157
best reported
actual #39 vs paper #324 285 places worse
paper 0.6390 ±0.0250
paper 0.6390 ±0.0250 Δ today 0.1786
57
TopKPool
actual #57 vs paper #322 265 places worse
0.8140 ±0.0094
best reported
actual #57 vs paper #322 265 places worse
paper 0.6460 ±0.0210
paper 0.6460 ±0.0210 Δ today 0.1680
137
SAGE
actual #137 vs paper #322 185 places worse
0.7970 ±0.0170
best reported
actual #137 vs paper #322 185 places worse
paper 0.6430 ±0.0190
paper 0.6430 ±0.0190 Δ at pub 0.1540
136
GraphSAGE
0.7970 ±0.0170
150
EdgePool
actual #150 vs paper #314 164 places worse
0.7920 ±0.0166
best reported
actual #150 vs paper #314 164 places worse
paper 0.6710 ±0.0270
paper 0.6710 ±0.0270 Δ today 0.1210
151
MLP
actual #151 vs paper #311 160 places worse
0.7920 ±0.0240
best reported
actual #151 vs paper #311 160 places worse
paper 0.6780 ±0.0320
paper 0.6780 ±0.0320 Δ today 0.1140
262
GIN0
0.7410 ±0.0160
This paper
319
Base Model
0.6540 ±0.0150
This paper
324
SAGE nacc
0.6410 ±0.0210
This paper
SOTA performance (not significantly different from the best) Baseline / comparison (this paper) Global context (other papers) Best at pub — reported result worse than the best known when published (best reported in green) Best today — OK at publication; today's leaderboard best is elsewhere