Optimal Transport Graph Neural Networks
Abstract
Current graph neural network (GNN) architectures naively average or sum node embeddings into an aggregated graph representation---potentially losing structural or semantic information. We here introduce OT-GNN, a model that computes graph embeddings using parametric prototypes that highlight key facets of different graph aspects. Towards this goal, we successfully combine optimal transport (OT) with parametric graph models. Graph representations are obtained from Wasserstein distances between the set of GNN node embeddings and ``prototype'' point clouds as free parameters. We theoretically prove that, unlike traditional sum aggregation, our function class on point clouds satisfies a fundamental universal approximation theorem. Empirically, we address an inherent collapse optimization issue by proposing a noise contrastive regularizer to steer the model towards truly exploiting the OT geometry. Finally, we outperform popular methods on several molecular property prediction tasks, while exhibiting smoother graph representations.
Benchmark Results
Tested on 3 datasets
Tables show presented results in global context (best 3 papers + GCN + MLP).
MoleculeNet
| # | Model | ROC-AUC ↑ | Paper |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | ProtoMol | 0.9140
±0.0030 | |
| 2 | MMSG | 0.9080
±0.0050 | |
| 3 | MemGNN | 0.9070 | |
| 20 | D-MPNN | 0.8780
±0.0320 best reported | best today: SE(3)-Invariant Multiparameter Persistent Homology for Chiral-Sensitive Molecular Property Prediction (NeurIPS 2023) Difference within reported uncertainty; not counted as underperformance. |
| 24 | ProtoW-L2 | 0.8730
±0.0150 | This paper |
| 29 | ProtoW-Dot | 0.8710
±0.0140 | This paper |
| 31 | Fingerprint+MLP | 0.8700
±0.0070 | This paper |
| 41 | ProtoS-L2 | 0.8650
±0.0100 | This paper |
| 43 | GIN | 0.8646
±0.0081 best reported | best today: Pre-training Graph Neural Networks on Molecules by Using Subgraph-Conditioned Graph Information Bottleneck (AAAI 2024) Difference within reported uncertainty; not counted as underperformance. |
| 52 | GAT | 0.8600
±0.0110 | This paper |
| 54 | D-MPNN+TopK Pool | 0.8600
±0.0330 | This paper |
| 63 | D-MPNN+SAG Pool | 0.8550
±0.0150 | This paper |
| 64 | GCN | 0.8540
±0.0110 |
| # | Model | RMSE ↓ | Paper |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Graphormer-SPIS | 0.4840
±0.0050 | |
| 2 | Graphormer-SPD | 0.4920
±0.0040 | |
| 3 | conan-FGW | 0.5140
±0.0190 | |
| 5 | GAT | 0.5520
±0.0070 best reported | best today: On Structural Expressive Power of Graph Transformers (KDD 2023) |
| 7 | GCN | 0.5640
±0.0150 | |
| 17 | ProtoW-Dot | 0.5940
±0.0310 | This paper |
| 19 | ProtoW-L2 | 0.6050
±0.0290 | This paper |
| 21 | ProtoS-L2 | 0.6110
±0.0340 | This paper |
| 25 | GIN | 0.6260
±0.0170 best reported | best today: On Structural Expressive Power of Graph Transformers (KDD 2023) Difference within reported uncertainty; not counted as underperformance. |
| 27 | D-MPNN | 0.6350
±0.0270 | This paper |
| 32 | D-MPNN+TopK Pool | 0.6730
±0.0870 | This paper |
| 33 | D-MPNN+SAG Pool | 0.6740
±0.0340 | This paper |
| 71 | Fingerprint+MLP | 0.9220
±0.0170 | This paper |
| # | Model | RMSE ↓ | Paper |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | MemGNN | 0.5560
±0.0230 | |
| 2 | ProtoS-L2 | 0.5800
±0.0160 | This paper |
| 3 | ProtoW-L2 | 0.6040
±0.0140 | This paper |
| 4 | ProtoW-Dot | 0.6290
±0.0150 | This paper |
| 6 | D-MPNN | 0.6460
±0.0410 | This paper |
| 7 | GCN | 0.6550
±0.0360 | |
| 9 | GIN | 0.6580
±0.0190 | This paper |
| 14 | D-MPNN+TopK Pool | 0.6750
±0.0800 | This paper |
| 28 | D-MPNN+SAG Pool | 0.7200
±0.0390 | This paper |
| 43 | GAT | 0.7530 best reported | best today: Application of Graph Neural Networks and graph descriptors for graph classification (2022) Difference within reported uncertainty; not counted as underperformance. |
| 79 | Fingerprint+MLP | 0.8850
±0.0170 | This paper |
