ICML 2021

Learning from Counterfactual Links for Link Prediction

Tong Zhao, Gang Liu, Daheng Wang, Wenhao Yu, Meng Jiang

Main figure for Learning from Counterfactual Links for Link Prediction

Abstract

Learning to predict missing links is important for many graph-based applications. Existing methods were designed to learn the association between observed graph structure and existence of link between a pair of nodes. However, the causal relationship between the two variables was largely ignored for learning to predict links on a graph. In this work, we visit this factor by asking a counterfactual question:"would the link still exist if the graph structure became different from observation?"Its answer, counterfactual links, will be able to augment the graph data for representation learning. To create these links, we employ causal models that consider the information (i.e., learned representations) of node pairs as context, global graph structural properties as treatment, and link existence as outcome. We propose a novel data augmentation-based link prediction method that creates counterfactual links and learns representations from both the observed and counterfactual links. Experiments on benchmark data show that our graph learning method achieves state-of-the-art performance on the task of link prediction.

Benchmark Results

Tested on 1 dataset

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

OGB

#ModelHits@20 ↑Paper
1
ELGNN
0.9777 ±0.0037
2
GIDN
0.9542
3
AGDN
0.9538 ±0.0094
11
CFLP w/ JKNet
0.8608 ±0.0198
This paper
18
CFLP w/ GSAGE
0.7549 ±0.0433
This paper
20
SAGE
0.6719 ±0.0118
24
GCN
actual #24 vs paper #53 29 places worse
0.6476 ±0.0145
best reported
actual #24 vs paper #53 29 places worse
paper 0.3707 ±0.0507
best at pub: OGB (NeurIPS 2020)
paper 0.3707 ±0.0507 Δ today 0.2769
25
Node2Vec
actual #25 vs paper #68 43 places worse
0.6363 ±0.0205
best reported
actual #25 vs paper #68 43 places worse
paper 0.2326 ±0.0209
paper 0.2326 ±0.0209 Δ at pub 0.0004 Δ today 0.4037
30
JKNet
0.6056 ±0.0869
This paper
39
GSAGE
0.5390 ±0.0474
This paper
40
CFLP w/ GCN
0.5251 ±0.0109
This paper
43
SEAL
actual #43 vs paper #59 16 places worse
0.4974 ±0.0239
best reported
actual #43 vs paper #59 16 places worse
paper 0.3056 ±0.0386
83
VGAE
0.1171 ±0.0196
This paper
87
MVGRL
0.1002 ±0.0101
This paper
SOTA performance (not significantly different from the best) Proposed method (this paper) Baseline / comparison (this paper) Global context (other papers) Best today — OK at publication; today's leaderboard best is elsewhere