Deep Graph Contrastive Representation Learning
Abstract
Graph representation learning nowadays becomes fundamental in analyzing graph-structured data. Inspired by recent success of contrastive methods, in this paper, we propose a novel framework for unsupervised graph representation learning by leveraging a contrastive objective at the node level. Specifically, we generate two graph views by corruption and learn node representations by maximizing the agreement of node representations in these two views. To provide diverse node contexts for the contrastive objective, we propose a hybrid scheme for generating graph views on both structure and attribute levels. Besides, we provide theoretical justification behind our motivation from two perspectives, mutual information and the classical triplet loss. We perform empirical experiments on both transductive and inductive learning tasks using a variety of real-world datasets. Experimental experiments demonstrate that despite its simplicity, our proposed method consistently outperforms existing state-of-the-art methods by large margins. Moreover, our unsupervised method even surpasses its supervised counterparts on transductive tasks, demonstrating its great potential in real-world applications.
Benchmark Results
Tested on 3 datasets 8 baseline values reported too low Non-standard metric on 1 dataset
Tables show presented results in global context (best 3 papers + GCN + MLP).
Classic
| # | Model | F1 ↑ | Paper |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | EnGCN | 0.9714
±0.0003 | |
| 2 | SAGN+SLE | 0.9710 | |
| 3 | GAMLP(JK) | 0.9704
±0.0001 | |
| 14 | GraphSAGE | 0.9660 | |
| 44 | GaAN-mean | 0.9580
±0.0010 | This paper |
| 53 | GraphSAGE-LSTM | 0.9540 best reported | best at pub: Inductive Representation Learning on Large Graphs (NeurIPS 2017) |
| 68 | GRACE | 0.9501
±0.0036 best reported | |
| 69 | GraphSAGE-mean | 0.9500 best reported | best at pub: Inductive Representation Learning on Large Graphs (NeurIPS 2017) |
| 76 | GraphSAGE-pool | 0.9480 best reported | best at pub: Inductive Representation Learning on Large Graphs (NeurIPS 2017) |
| 82 | DGI | 0.9414
±0.0003 best reported | best at pub: Deep Learning on Graphs: A Survey (2018) best today: Calibrating and Improving Graph Contrastive Learning (TMLR 2021) Difference within reported uncertainty; not counted as underperformance. |
| 91 | FastGCN | 0.9370 | This paper |
| 107 | GraphSAGE-GCN | 0.9300 best reported | best at pub: Inductive Representation Learning on Large Graphs (NeurIPS 2017) |
| 127 | DeepWalk + features | 0.6910 | This paper |
| 132 | Raw features | 0.5850 | This paper |
| 143 | DeepWalk | 0.3240 | This paper |
| # | Model | F1 ↑ | Paper |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | GAMLP(JK) | 0.9982
±0.0001 | |
| 2 | GraphCON-GCN | 0.9960 | |
| 3 | GCNII | 0.9953
±0.0001 | |
| 21 | GCN | 0.9850 | |
| 68 | GaAN-mean | 0.9690
±0.0020 | This paper |
| 126 | GRACE | 0.6971
±0.0017 best reported | best today: Disentangled Generative Graph Representation Learning (2024) |
| 148 | DGI | 0.6380
±0.0020 | This paper |
| 154 | GraphSAGE-LSTM | 0.6120 best reported | best at pub: Inductive Representation Learning on Large Graphs (NeurIPS 2017) best today: Auto-GNN: Neural Architecture Search of Graph Neural Networks (2019) |
| 157 | GraphSAGE-pool | 0.6020 best reported | best at pub: GraphZoom: A Multi-level Spectral Approach for Accurate and Scalable Graph Embedding (ICLR 2019) |
| 158 | GraphSAGE-GCN | 0.6010 best reported | best at pub: GraphZoom: A Multi-level Spectral Approach for Accurate and Scalable Graph Embedding (ICLR 2019) |
| 159 | GraphSAGE-mean | 0.5980 best reported | best at pub: Inductive Representation Learning on Large Graphs (NeurIPS 2017) best today: GraphZoom: A Multi-level Spectral Approach for Accurate and Scalable Graph Embedding (ICLR 2019) |
| 173 | MLP | 0.4620 | |
| 176 | Raw features | 0.4250
±0.0030 best reported | best at pub: Inductive Representation Learning on Large Graphs (NeurIPS 2017) Difference within reported uncertainty; not counted as underperformance. |
Heterogeneous Graph Benchmarks
DBLP
Global leaderboard →Sorted by Accuracy. Highlighted rows are from other papers.
| # | Model | Accuracy ↑ | Paper |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | HG-SCM | 0.9490
±0.0015 | |
| 2 | SeHGNN | 0.9489
±0.0018 | |
| 3 | AdvSynGNN | 0.9486
±0.0012 | |
| 11 | GAE | 0.9410
±0.0030 best reported | best today: Revisiting Graph Autoencoders as Implicit Contrastive Learners (KDD 2024) |
| 34 | DGI | 0.8800
±0.0020 best reported | best today: I'm Me, We're Us, and I'm Us: Tri-directional Contrastive Learning on Hypergraphs (AAAI 2022) |
| 36 | GCN | 0.8270 | prev best: Directed Graph Convolutional Network (2020) best today: I'm Me, We're Us, and I'm Us: Tri-directional Contrastive Learning on Hypergraphs (AAAI 2022) |
| 54 | GRACE | 0.8420
±0.0010 | This paper |
| 62 | VGAE | 0.8170 | This paper |
| 61 | SGC | 0.8170 | prev best: Directed Graph Convolutional Network (2020) |
| 65 | MLP | 0.8118
±0.0020 | |
| 79 | Node2Vec | 0.7880 | This paper |
| 81 | DeepWalk + features | 0.7810 | This paper |
| 93 | DeepWalk | 0.7590 | This paper |
| 105 | GraphSAGE | 0.7455
±0.0061 | |
| 113 | Raw features | 0.7160 | This paper |
