ICML 2020

Contrastive Multi-View Representation Learning on Graphs

Kaveh Hassani, Amir Hosein Khas Ahmadi

Main figure for Contrastive Multi-View Representation Learning on Graphs

Abstract

We introduce a self-supervised approach for learning node and graph level representations by contrasting structural views of graphs. We show that unlike visual representation learning, increasing the number of views to more than two or contrasting multi-scale encodings do not improve performance, and the best performance is achieved by contrasting encodings from first-order neighbors and a graph diffusion. We achieve new state-of-the-art results in self-supervised learning on 8 out of 8 node and graph classification benchmarks under the linear evaluation protocol. For example, on Cora (node) and Reddit-Binary (graph) classification benchmarks, we achieve 86.8% and 84.5% accuracy, which are 5.5% and 2.4% relative improvements over previous state-of-the-art. When compared to supervised baselines, our approach outperforms them in 4 out of 8 benchmarks. Source code is released at: this https URL

Benchmark Results

Tested on 4 datasets 1 baseline value reported too low

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

TU Dortmund

#ModelAccuracy ↑Paper
1
MSH-GNN
0.9910 ±0.0030
2
ID-GNN+BEC
0.9830 ±0.0360
3
SupCosine
0.9830 ±0.0250
39
GIN
0.9330 ±0.0290
159
WL
actual #159 vs paper #597 438 places worse
0.9040 ±0.0570
best reported
actual #159 vs paper #597 438 places worse
paper 0.8070 ±0.0300
paper 0.8070 ±0.0300 Δ at pub 0.0550 Δ today 0.0970
214
MI
0.8970 ±0.0110
This paper
257
InfoGraph
actual #257 vs paper #272 15 places worse
0.8930 ±0.0514
best reported
actual #257 vs paper #272 15 places worse
paper 0.8900 ±0.0110

Difference within reported uncertainty; not counted as underperformance.

paper 0.8900 ±0.0110 Δ today 0.0030
274
GIN-ε
actual #274 vs paper #274
0.8900 ±0.0600
actual #274 vs paper #274
paper 0.8900 ±0.0600

Improvement within reported uncertainty; not highlighted.

paper 0.8900 ±0.0600 Δ at pub 0.0560
332
MLG
actual #332 vs paper #334 2 places worse
0.8794 ±0.0161
best reported
actual #332 vs paper #334 2 places worse
paper 0.8790 ±0.0160
best at pub: The Multiscale Laplacian Graph Kernel (NeurIPS 2016)

Difference within reported uncertainty; not counted as underperformance.

paper 0.8790 ±0.0160 Δ at pub 0.0004
365
DGK
actual #365 vs paper #366 1 place worse
0.8744 ±0.0272
best reported
actual #365 vs paper #366 1 place worse
paper 0.8740 ±0.0270
best at pub: Provably Powerful Graph Networks (NeurIPS 2019)

Difference within reported uncertainty; not counted as underperformance.

paper 0.8740 ±0.0270 Δ at pub 0.0004 Δ today 0.0004
403
MLP
0.8660 ±0.0495
407
graph2vec
actual #407 vs paper #515 108 places worse
0.8644 ±0.0125
best reported
actual #407 vs paper #515 108 places worse
paper 0.8320 ±0.0960

Difference within reported uncertainty; not counted as underperformance.

paper 0.8320 ±0.0960 Δ today 0.0324
426
SP
actual #426 vs paper #443 17 places worse
0.8580 ±0.0020
best reported
actual #426 vs paper #443 17 places worse
paper 0.8520 ±0.0240
best at pub: Propagation Kernels (2014)

Difference within reported uncertainty; not counted as underperformance.

paper 0.8520 ±0.0240 Δ at pub 0.0060
472
Sub2Vec
actual #472 vs paper #786 314 places worse
0.8447 ±0.0037
best reported
actual #472 vs paper #786 314 places worse
paper 0.6110 ±0.1580

Difference within reported uncertainty; not counted as underperformance.

paper 0.6110 ±0.1580 Δ today 0.2337
500
random walk
0.8370 ±0.0150
This paper
506
GK
actual #506 vs paper #575 69 places worse
0.8170 ±0.0210
actual #506 vs paper #575 69 places worse
paper 0.8170 ±0.0210

Improvement within reported uncertainty; not highlighted.

paper 0.8170 ±0.0210 Δ at pub 0.0012
746
Node2Vec
actual #746 vs paper #746
0.7263 ±0.1020
best reported
actual #746 vs paper #746
paper 0.7260 ±0.1020

Difference within reported uncertainty; not counted as underperformance.

paper 0.7260 ±0.1020 Δ today 0.0003
#ModelAccuracy ↑Paper
1
ID-GNN+BEC
0.8150 ±0.0240
2
GIN+BEC
0.8080 ±0.0330
3
GCN+BEC
0.7990 ±0.0340
4
GCN
actual #4 vs paper #56 52 places worse
0.7980 ±0.0230
best reported
actual #4 vs paper #56 52 places worse
paper 0.7400 ±0.0340
paper 0.7400 ±0.0340 Δ today 0.0580
14
GIN
0.7810 ±0.0350
36
GIN-0
0.7510 ±0.0510
This paper
48
GIN-ε
0.7430 ±0.0510
This paper
50
MI
0.7420 ±0.0070
This paper
56
GAT
actual #56 vs paper #133 77 places worse
0.7407 ±0.0453
best reported
actual #56 vs paper #133 77 places worse
paper 0.7050 ±0.0230

Difference within reported uncertainty; not counted as underperformance.

paper 0.7050 ±0.0230 Δ today 0.0357
72
WL
actual #72 vs paper #98 26 places worse
0.7340 ±0.0463
best reported
actual #72 vs paper #98 26 places worse
paper 0.7230 ±0.0340

Difference within reported uncertainty; not counted as underperformance.

paper 0.7230 ±0.0340 Δ today 0.0110
82
InfoGraph
actual #82 vs paper #82
0.7303 ±0.0087
best reported
actual #82 vs paper #82
paper 0.7300 ±0.0090

Difference within reported uncertainty; not counted as underperformance.

paper 0.7300 ±0.0090 Δ today 0.0003
99
GraphSAGE
0.7230 ±0.0530
This paper
125
graph2vec
0.7110 ±0.0050
This paper
140
DGK
actual #140 vs paper #140
0.6700 ±0.0060
actual #140 vs paper #140
paper 0.6700 ±0.0060

Improvement within reported uncertainty; not highlighted.

paper 0.6700 ±0.0060 Δ at pub 0.0004
141
MLG
0.6660 ±0.0030
This paper
142
GK
actual #142 vs paper #142
0.6590 ±0.0100
actual #142 vs paper #142
paper 0.6590 ±0.0100

Improvement within reported uncertainty; not highlighted.

paper 0.6590 ±0.0100 Δ at pub 0.0003
153
SP
0.5560 ±0.0020
This paper
154
Sub2Vec
0.5530 ±0.0150
This paper
157
random walk
0.5070 ±0.0030
This paper
#ModelAccuracy ↑Paper
1
GraphSNN
0.7790 ±0.0360
2
SIN
0.7560 ±0.0320
3
CIN
0.7560 ±0.0370
5
GIN
0.7510 ±0.0510
32
GIN-0
0.5230 ±0.0280
This paper
36
GIN-ε
0.5210 ±0.0360
This paper
38
GCN
0.5190 ±0.0380
This paper
44
MI
0.5120 ±0.0050
This paper
46
GraphSAGE
0.5090 ±0.0220
This paper
53
graph2vec
0.5040 ±0.0090
This paper
67
InfoGraph
0.4970 ±0.0050
This paper
69
GAT
actual #69 vs paper #90 21 places worse
0.4967 ±0.0430
best reported
actual #69 vs paper #90 21 places worse
paper 0.4780 ±0.0310

Difference within reported uncertainty; not counted as underperformance.

paper 0.4780 ±0.0310 Δ today 0.0187
72
WL
actual #72 vs paper #93 21 places worse
0.4933 ±0.0475
best reported
actual #72 vs paper #93 21 places worse
paper 0.4700 ±0.0050

Difference within reported uncertainty; not counted as underperformance.

paper 0.4700 ±0.0050 Δ today 0.0233
109
DGK
actual #109 vs paper #109
0.4460 ±0.0050
actual #109 vs paper #109
paper 0.4460 ±0.0050

Improvement within reported uncertainty; not highlighted.

paper 0.4460 ±0.0050 Δ at pub 0.0005
110
GK
actual #110 vs paper #110
0.4390 ±0.0040
actual #110 vs paper #110
paper 0.4390 ±0.0040

Improvement within reported uncertainty; not highlighted.

paper 0.4390 ±0.0040 Δ at pub 0.0001
112
MLG
0.4120
This paper
113
SP
0.3800 ±0.0030
This paper
114
Sub2Vec
0.3670 ±0.0080
This paper
116
random walk
0.3470 ±0.0020
This paper
#ModelAccuracy ↑Paper
1
GIN-0
0.9240 ±0.0250
This paper
2
GIN-ε
0.9220 ±0.0230
This paper
3
DMoN
0.9100 ±0.0100
33
GAT
0.8520 ±0.0330
This paper
36
MI
0.8450 ±0.0060
This paper
38
InfoGraph
0.8250 ±0.0140
This paper
42
DGK
0.7800 ±0.0040
This paper
43
GK
0.7730 ±0.0020
This paper
44
graph2vec
0.7580 ±0.0100
This paper
45
Sub2Vec
0.7150 ±0.0040
This paper
46
WL
0.6880 ±0.0040
This paper
47
SP
0.6410 ±0.0010
This paper
49
GCN
actual #49 vs paper #50 1 place worse
0.5653 ±0.0260
best reported
actual #49 vs paper #50 1 place worse
paper 0.5000
SOTA performance (not significantly different from the best) Proposed method (this paper) 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