ICLR 2020

Heterophilic Graphs

Hongbin Pei, Bingzhen Wei, K. Chang, Yu Lei, Bo Yang

Main figure for Heterophilic Graphs

Abstract

Message-passing neural networks (MPNNs) have been successfully applied to representation learning on graphs in a variety of real-world applications. However, two fundamental weaknesses of MPNNs' aggregators limit their ability to represent graph-structured data: losing the structural information of nodes in neighborhoods and lacking the ability to capture long-range dependencies in disassortative graphs. Few studies have noticed the weaknesses from different perspectives. From the observations on classical neural network and network geometry, we propose a novel geometric aggregation scheme for graph neural networks to overcome the two weaknesses. The behind basic idea is the aggregation on a graph can benefit from a continuous space underlying the graph. The proposed aggregation scheme is permutation-invariant and consists of three modules, node embedding, structural neighborhood, and bi-level aggregation. We also present an implementation of the scheme in graph convolutional networks, termed Geom-GCN, to perform transductive learning on graphs. Experimental results show the proposed Geom-GCN achieved state-of-the-art performance on a wide range of open datasets of graphs.

Benchmark Results

Tested on 2 datasets

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

Heterophilic Graphs

#ModelAccuracy ↑Paper
1
P^2GNN
0.9672 ±0.0147
2
DoG
0.9660 ±0.0210
3
GPF-plus
0.9583 ±0.0419
34
MLP
0.9230 ±0.0070
53
GraphSAGE
0.9000 ±0.0365
211
GAT
actual #211 vs paper #533 322 places worse
0.8162 ±0.0645
best reported
actual #211 vs paper #533 322 places worse
paper 0.5838
257
GCN
actual #257 vs paper #576 319 places worse
0.7933 ±0.0447
best reported
actual #257 vs paper #576 319 places worse
paper 0.5216
best today: Graph Wave Networks (WWW 2025)
paper 0.5216 Δ today 0.2717
348
Geom-GCN-S
actual #348 vs paper #508 160 places worse
0.7350
best reported
actual #348 vs paper #508 160 places worse
paper 0.5973
paper 0.5973 Δ today 0.1377
416
Geom-GCN-P
0.6757
This paper
548
Geom-GCN-I
0.5758
This paper
#ModelAccuracy ↑Paper
1
DiGGR
0.4535 ±0.0353
2
TRIGON
0.4402 ±0.0028
3
DoG
0.4320 ±0.0120
42
MLP
0.4026 ±0.0108
68
GraphSAGE
0.3899 ±0.0085
135
GCN
actual #135 vs paper #411 276 places worse
0.3690
best reported
actual #135 vs paper #411 276 places worse
paper 0.2686
paper 0.2686 Δ today 0.1004
182
GAT
actual #182 vs paper #385 203 places worse
0.3605 ±0.0035
best reported
actual #182 vs paper #385 203 places worse
paper 0.2845
paper 0.2845 Δ today 0.0760
248
Geom-GCN-S
actual #248 vs paper #342 94 places worse
0.3460
best reported
actual #248 vs paper #342 94 places worse
paper 0.3030
paper 0.3030 Δ today 0.0430
306
Geom-GCN-P
0.3163
This paper
371
Geom-GCN-I
0.2909
This paper
SOTA performance (not significantly different from the best) Proposed method (this paper) Global context (other papers) Best today — OK at publication; today's leaderboard best is elsewhere