AAAI 2020

Contrastive Self-supervised Learning for Graph Classification

Jiaqi Zeng, Pengtao Xie

Main figure for Contrastive Self-supervised Learning for Graph Classification

Abstract

Graph classification is a widely studied problem and has broad applications. In many real-world problems, the number of labeled graphs available for training classification models is limited, which renders these models prone to overfitting. To address this problem, we propose two approaches based on contrastive self-supervised learning (CSSL) to alleviate overfitting. In the first approach, we use CSSL to pretrain graph encoders on widely-available unlabeled graphs without relying on human-provided labels, then finetune the pretrained encoders on labeled graphs. In the second approach, we develop a regularizer based on CSSL, and solve the supervised classification task and the unsupervised CSSL task simultaneously. To perform CSSL on graphs, given a collection of original graphs, we perform data augmentation to create augmented graphs out of the original graphs. An augmented graph is created by consecutively applying a sequence of graph alteration operations. A contrastive loss is defined to learn graph encoders by judging whether two augmented graphs are from the same original graph. Experiments on various graph classification datasets demonstrate the effectiveness of our proposed methods.

Benchmark Results

Tested on 2 datasets 6 baseline values reported too low

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

TU Dortmund

#ModelAccuracy ↑Paper
1
WL-MLP
0.9954
2
GIN
0.9934
3
GCN
actual #3 vs paper #383 380 places worse
0.9727
best reported
actual #3 vs paper #383 380 places worse
paper 0.7629 ±0.0179
paper 0.7629 ±0.0179 Δ at pub 0.0391 Δ today 0.2098
4
GAT
actual #4 vs paper #416 412 places worse
0.9623
best reported
actual #4 vs paper #416 412 places worse
paper 0.7490 ±0.0172
paper 0.7490 ±0.0172 Δ today 0.2133
5
DiffPool
actual #5 vs paper #329 324 places worse
0.7773 ±0.0083
actual #5 vs paper #329 324 places worse
paper 0.7773 ±0.0083
paper 0.7773 ±0.0083 Δ at pub 0.0663 Δ today 0.1437
12
WL
actual #12 vs paper #371 359 places worse
0.8590 ±0.0010
best reported
actual #12 vs paper #371 359 places worse
paper 0.7665 ±0.0199
best at pub: Propagation Kernels (2014)
paper 0.7665 ±0.0199 Δ at pub 0.0925
131
GraphSAGE
actual #131 vs paper #417 286 places worse
0.8200 ±0.0100
best reported
actual #131 vs paper #417 286 places worse
paper 0.7473 ±0.0134
paper 0.7473 ±0.0134 Δ at pub 0.0297 Δ today 0.0727
222
CSSL-Reg A3-specific
0.8009 ±0.0107
This paper
223
CSSL-Reg A1-specific
0.8007 ±0.0060
This paper
250
CSSL-Pretrain A3-specific
0.7944 ±0.0067
This paper
259
SAGPool
actual #259 vs paper #325 66 places worse
0.7788 ±0.0159
actual #259 vs paper #325 66 places worse
paper 0.7788 ±0.0159

Improvement within reported uncertainty; not highlighted.

paper 0.7788 ±0.0159 Δ at pub 0.0848
267
EdgePool
actual #267 vs paper #372 105 places worse
0.7893 ±0.0222
best reported
actual #267 vs paper #372 105 places worse
paper 0.7656 ±0.0101
best today: Graph Parsing Networks (ICLR 2024)

Difference within reported uncertainty; not counted as underperformance.

paper 0.7656 ±0.0101 Δ today 0.0237
278
EigenPool
actual #278 vs paper #349 71 places worse
0.7870 ±0.0190
best reported
actual #278 vs paper #349 71 places worse
paper 0.7724 ±0.0096

Difference within reported uncertainty; not counted as underperformance.

paper 0.7724 ±0.0096 Δ today 0.0146
285
CSSL-Pretrain A1-specific
0.7862 ±0.0063
This paper
299
HGP-SL
0.7845 ±0.0077
This paper
338
InfoGraph
actual #338 vs paper #473 135 places worse
0.7750 ±0.0074
best reported
actual #338 vs paper #473 135 places worse
paper 0.7093 ±0.0178
paper 0.7093 ±0.0178 Δ today 0.0657
373
DGCNN
actual #373 vs paper #437 64 places worse
0.7650 ±0.0190
best reported
actual #373 vs paper #437 64 places worse
paper 0.7408 ±0.0219

Difference within reported uncertainty; not counted as underperformance.

paper 0.7408 ±0.0219 Δ at pub 0.0036 Δ today 0.0242
386
gPool
0.7625 ±0.0139
This paper
421
SP
actual #421 vs paper #509 88 places worse
0.7450 ±0.0030
best reported
actual #421 vs paper #509 88 places worse
paper 0.6744 ±0.0276
paper 0.6744 ±0.0276 Δ at pub 0.0706
456
CSSL-Freeze A3-specific
0.7270 ±0.0194
This paper
459
CSSL-Freeze A1-specific
0.7260 ±0.0143
This paper
463
Set2Set
actual #463 vs paper #489 26 places worse
0.7170 ±0.0073
best reported
actual #463 vs paper #489 26 places worse
paper 0.6962 ±0.0132
paper 0.6962 ±0.0132 Δ at pub 0.0188 Δ today 0.0208
472
GCC-finetuning
0.7100 ±0.0178
This paper
515
GCC-freezing
0.6633 ±0.0265
This paper
533
Graphlet
actual #533 vs paper #542 9 places worse
0.6248 ±0.0211
actual #533 vs paper #542 9 places worse
paper 0.6248 ±0.0211
prev best: The Multiscale Laplacian Graph Kernel (NeurIPS 2016)

Improvement within reported uncertainty; not highlighted.

paper 0.6248 ±0.0211 Δ at pub 0.0008
#ModelAccuracy ↑Paper
1
GC-GNN (GCN)
0.9210 ±0.0810
2
SUGAR
0.8403 ±0.0133
3
Ortho-g-U-Nets
0.8387
8
CSSL-Reg A1-specific
0.8218 ±0.0134
This paper
9
CSSL-Pretrain A1-specific
0.8202 ±0.0142
This paper
14
HGP-SL
0.8096 ±0.0126
This paper
15
SAGE
0.8088 ±0.0233
16
CSSL-Pretrain A1-all
0.8084 ±0.0124
This paper
17
CSSL-Pretrain A3-specific
0.8084 ±0.0154
This paper
18
DiffPool
actual #18 vs paper #58 40 places worse
0.8064
best reported
actual #18 vs paper #58 40 places worse
paper 0.7861 ±0.0132
best at pub: Graph U-Nets (2019)
best today: Orthogonal Graph Neural Networks (AAAI 2021)

Difference within reported uncertainty; not counted as underperformance.

paper 0.7861 ±0.0132 Δ at pub 0.0203 Δ today 0.0203
19
CSSL-Reg A1-all
0.8050 ±0.0134
This paper
21
CSSL-Pretrain A3-all
0.8025 ±0.0141
This paper
25
WL
actual #25 vs paper #109 84 places worse
0.7978 ±0.0036
best reported
actual #25 vs paper #109 84 places worse
paper 0.7644 ±0.0235

Difference within reported uncertainty; not counted as underperformance.

paper 0.7644 ±0.0235 Δ at pub 0.0334 Δ today 0.0334
29
CSSL-Reg A3-specific
0.7966 ±0.0171
This paper
31
CSSL-Reg A3-all
0.7958 ±0.0141
This paper
37
DGCNN
actual #37 vs paper #171 134 places worse
0.7937
best reported
actual #37 vs paper #171 134 places worse
paper 0.7006 ±0.0121
best today: Orthogonal Graph Neural Networks (AAAI 2021)
paper 0.7006 ±0.0121 Δ at pub 0.0931 Δ today 0.0931
41
EdgePool
0.7920 ±0.0261
This paper
43
GCN
actual #43 vs paper #155 112 places worse
0.7912 ±0.0307
best reported
actual #43 vs paper #155 112 places worse
paper 0.7326 ±0.0446
best today: Hierarchical Graph Capsule Network (AAAI 2020)

Difference within reported uncertainty; not counted as underperformance.

paper 0.7326 ±0.0446 Δ at pub 0.0264 Δ today 0.0586
45
SP
actual #45 vs paper #54 9 places worse
0.7900 ±0.0060
best reported
actual #45 vs paper #54 9 places worse
paper 0.7872 ±0.0389

Difference within reported uncertainty; not counted as underperformance.

paper 0.7872 ±0.0389 Δ at pub 0.0028
54
CSSL-Freeze A1-specific
0.7874 ±0.0092
This paper
56
SAGPool
actual #56 vs paper #56
0.7870 ±0.0229
actual #56 vs paper #56
paper 0.7870 ±0.0229

Improvement within reported uncertainty; not highlighted.

paper 0.7870 ±0.0229 Δ at pub 0.0163
57
EigenPool
actual #57 vs paper #57
0.7863 ±0.0136
actual #57 vs paper #57
paper 0.7863 ±0.0136

Improvement within reported uncertainty; not highlighted.

paper 0.7863 ±0.0136 Δ at pub 0.0003
61
CSSL-Freeze A3-specific
0.7849 ±0.0094
This paper
62
Graphlet
actual #62 vs paper #158 96 places worse
0.7845
best reported
actual #62 vs paper #158 96 places worse
paper 0.7254 ±0.0383

Difference within reported uncertainty; not counted as underperformance.

paper 0.7254 ±0.0383 Δ at pub 0.0591
83
CSSL-Freeze A3-all
0.7773 ±0.0173
This paper
99
GAT
actual #99 vs paper #99
0.7730 ±0.0368
actual #99 vs paper #99
paper 0.7730 ±0.0368

Improvement within reported uncertainty; not highlighted.

paper 0.7730 ±0.0368 Δ at pub 0.0640
104
gPool
0.7702 ±0.0132
This paper
109
GraphSAGE
actual #109 vs paper #123 14 places worse
0.7660
best reported
actual #109 vs paper #123 14 places worse
paper 0.7578 ±0.0391

Difference within reported uncertainty; not counted as underperformance.

paper 0.7578 ±0.0391 Δ at pub 0.0082
120
CSSL-Freeze A1-all
0.7596 ±0.0160
This paper
126
GCC-freezing
0.7563 ±0.0322
This paper
131
GCC-finetuning
0.7546 ±0.0244
This paper
146
Set2Set
actual #146 vs paper #167 21 places worse
0.7450
best reported
actual #146 vs paper #167 21 places worse
paper 0.7083 ±0.0084
paper 0.7083 ±0.0084 Δ at pub 0.0367
148
InfoGraph
0.7424 ±0.0086
This paper
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) Improved at pub — later paper surpassed this result Best today — OK at publication; today's leaderboard best is elsewhere