Graph convolutions that can finally model local structure
Abstract
Despite quick progress in the last few years, recent studies have shown that modern graph neural networks can still fail at very simple tasks, like detecting small cycles. This hints at the fact that current networks fail to catch information about the local structure, which is problematic if the downstream task heavily relies on graph substructure analysis, as in the context of chemistry. We propose a very simple correction to the now standard GIN convolution that enables the network to detect small cycles with nearly no cost in terms of computation time and number of parameters. Tested on real life molecule property datasets, our model consistently improves performance on large multi-tasked datasets over all baselines, both globally and on a per-task setting.
Benchmark Results
Tested on 3 datasets
Tables show presented results in global context (best 3 papers + GCN + MLP).
OGB
| # | Model | ROC-AUC ↑ | Paper |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Multi-RF Fusion with Multi-GNN Blending | 0.8476
±0.0002 | |
| 2 | HyperFusion | 0.8475
±0.0003 | |
| 3 | PAS+FPs | 0.8420
±0.0015 | |
| 9 | GatedGCN | 0.8090
±0.0160 | |
| 70 | HIMP | 0.7880
±0.0080 | This paper |
| 78 | DeeperGCN | 0.7860
±0.0120 | This paper |
| 109 | GIN | 0.7780
±0.0182 | |
| 148 | GINE w/ VN | 0.7710
±0.0150 | This paper |
| 171 | GINe+ K=1 w/ VN | 0.7660
±0.0140 | This paper |
| 184 | GCN | 0.7610
±0.0100 | prev best: Rethinking Graph Regularization for Graph Neural Networks (AAAI 2020) Improvement within reported uncertainty; not highlighted. |
| 203 | GCN w/ VN | 0.7600
±0.0120 | This paper |
| 213 | NaiveGINe+ K=3 w/ VN | 0.7580
±0.0130 | This paper |
| 220 | GINE | 0.7560
±0.0140 | This paper |
MoleculeNet
Tox21
Global leaderboard →Default metric is ROC-AUC. The paper reports 8 values on ROC-AUC and 8 values on Accuracy .
| # | Model | ROC-AUC ↑ default | Accuracy ↑ | Paper |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | HIMP | 0.8740
±
0.0050 | 0.8740
±
0.0050 | Accuracy
0.8740
±
0.0050 |
| 2 | GINE w/ VN | 0.8720
±
0.0030 | 0.8720
±
0.0030 | Accuracy
0.8720
±
0.0030 |
| 3 | NaiveGINe+ K=3 w/ VN | 0.8700
±
0.0040 | 0.8700
±
0.0040 | Accuracy
0.8700
±
0.0040 |
| 4 | GINe+ K=1 w/ VN | 0.8670
±
0.0040 | 0.8670
±
0.0040 | Accuracy
0.8670
±
0.0040 |
| 5 | GINE | 0.8668
±0.0077 best reported | 0.8500
±
0.0090 | Accuracy
0.8500
±
0.0090 |
| 6 | GCN w/ VN | 0.8590
±
0.0050 | 0.8590
±
0.0050 | Accuracy
0.8590
±
0.0050 |
| 14 | GCN | 0.8400
±0.0040 | 0.8400
±
0.0040 | Accuracy
0.8400
±
0.0040 prev best: Memory-Based Graph Networks (ICLR 2020) |
| 23 | DeeperGCN | 0.8310
±
0.0040 | 0.8310
±
0.0040 | Accuracy
0.8310
±
0.0040 |
| 24 | GIN | 0.8290
±
0.0069 | — |
ToxCast
Global leaderboard →Default metric is ROC-AUC. The paper reports 8 values on ROC-AUC and 8 values on Accuracy .
| # | Model | ROC-AUC ↑ default | Accuracy ↑ | Paper |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | GeomGCL | 0.7630 | — | |
| 2 | LiGhT DeepGPT | 0.7570
±
0.0110 | — | |
| 3 | CoMPT | 0.7550 | — | |
| 4 | GINE w/ VN | 0.7490
±
0.0020 | 0.7490
±
0.0020 | Accuracy
0.7490
±
0.0020 |
| 5 | GINe+ K=1 w/ VN | 0.7490
±
0.0080 | 0.7490
±
0.0080 | Accuracy
0.7490
±
0.0080 |
| 9 | GCN w/ VN | 0.7430
±
0.0030 | 0.7430
±
0.0030 | Accuracy
0.7430
±
0.0030 |
| 12 | GINE | 0.7410
±
0.0040 | 0.7410
±
0.0040 | Accuracy
0.7410
±
0.0040 |
| 13 | NaiveGINe+ K=3 w/ VN | 0.7370
±
0.0070 | 0.7370
±
0.0070 | Accuracy
0.7370
±
0.0070 |
| 14 | GCN | 0.7350
±0.0020 | 0.7350
±
0.0020 | Accuracy
0.7350
±
0.0020 prev best: Adaptive Graph Convolutional Neural Networks (AAAI 2018) |
| 21 | HIMP | 0.7210
±
0.0040 | 0.7210
±
0.0040 | Accuracy
0.7210
±
0.0040 |
| 29 | DeeperGCN | 0.7140
±
0.0050 | 0.7140
±
0.0050 | Accuracy
0.7140
±
0.0050 |
| 32 | GIN | 0.7095
±
0.0027 | — |
