Prototypical Graph Contrastive Learning
Abstract
Graph-level representations are critical in various real-world applications, such as predicting the properties of molecules. But in practice, precise graph annotations are generally very expensive and time-consuming. To address this issue, graph contrastive learning constructs instance discrimination task which pulls together positive pairs (augmentation pairs of the same graph) and pushes away negative pairs (augmentation pairs of different graphs) for unsupervised representation learning. However, since for a query, its negatives are uniformly sampled from all graphs, existing methods suffer from the critical sampling bias issue, i.e., the negatives likely having the same semantic structure with the query, leading to performance degradation. To mitigate this sampling bias issue, in this paper, we propose a Prototypical Graph Contrastive Learning (PGCL) approach. Specifically, PGCL models the underlying semantic structure of the graph data via clustering semantically similar graphs into the same group, and simultaneously encourages the clustering consistency for different augmentations of the same graph. Then given a query, it performs negative sampling via drawing the graphs from those clusters that differ from the cluster of query, which ensures the semantic difference between query and its negative samples. Moreover, for a query, PGCL further reweights its negative samples based on the distance between their prototypes (cluster centroids) and the query prototype such that those negatives having moderate prototype distance enjoy relatively large weights. This reweighting strategy is proved to be more effective than uniform sampling. Experimental results on various graph benchmarks testify the advantages of our PGCL over state-of-the-art methods. Code is publicly available at https://github.com/ha-lins/PGCL.
Benchmark Results
Tested on 4 datasets 10 baseline values reported too low
Tables show presented results in global context (best 3 papers + GCN + MLP).
TU Dortmund
| # | Model | Accuracy ↑ | 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 | |
| 63 | GCN | 0.9220
±0.0440 best reported | best at pub: Breaking the Limits of Message Passing Graph Neural Networks (ICML 2021) best today: Depth-Adaptive Graph Neural Networks via Learnable Bakry-Émery Curvature (KDD 2025) Difference within reported uncertainty; not counted as underperformance. |
| 106 | PGCL | 0.9110
±0.0120 | This paper |
| 158 | GraphSAGE | 0.9040
±0.0780 best reported | best at pub: Graph Neural Networks With Convolutional ARMA Filters (2019) best today: Asynchronous Neural Networks for Learning in Graphs (2022) Difference within reported uncertainty; not counted as underperformance. |
| 159 | WL | 0.9040
±0.0570 best reported | best at pub: Understanding Isomorphism Bias in Graph Data Sets (2019) best today: How Powerful are $K$-hop Message Passing Graph Neural Networks (NeurIPS 2022) |
| 199 | MVGRL | 0.8993
±0.0616 best reported | best at pub: Graph Self-Supervised Learning: A Survey (2021) best today: Improving Expressivity of GNNs with Subgraph-specific Factor Embedded Normalization (KDD 2023) Difference within reported uncertainty; not counted as underperformance. |
| 238 | GIN-0 | 0.8940
±0.0560 | This paper |
| 257 | InfoGraph | 0.8930
±0.0514 best reported | best at pub: Graph Contrastive Learning Automated (ICML 2021) best today: Improving Expressivity of GNNs with Subgraph-specific Factor Embedded Normalization (KDD 2023) Difference within reported uncertainty; not counted as underperformance. |
| 274 | GIN-ε | 0.8900
±0.0600 | This paper |
| 332 | MLG | 0.8794
±0.0161 best reported | best at pub: The Multiscale Laplacian Graph Kernel (NeurIPS 2016) Difference within reported uncertainty; not counted as underperformance. |
| 354 | GraphCL | 0.8766
±0.0103 best reported | best at pub: Graph Contrastive Learning Automated (ICML 2021) best today: Graph Masked Autoencoders with Transformers (2022) Difference within reported uncertainty; not counted as underperformance. |
| 365 | DGK | 0.8744
±0.0272 best reported | best at pub: Provably Powerful Graph Networks (NeurIPS 2019) best today: Model-Driven Graph Contrastive Learning (2025) Difference within reported uncertainty; not counted as underperformance. |
| 381 | GCKN | 0.8720
±0.0680 | This paper |
| 403 | MLP | 0.8660
±0.0495 | |
| 407 | graph2vec | 0.8644
±0.0125 best reported | best at pub: CogDL: A Comprehensive Library for Graph Deep Learning (WWW 2021) best today: Graph Masked Autoencoders with Transformers (2022) Difference within reported uncertainty; not counted as underperformance. |
| 408 | GCC | 0.8640
±0.0050 | This paper |
| 444 | GL | 0.8520
±0.0090 best reported | best at pub: On Valid Optimal Assignment Kernels and Applications to Graph Classification (NeurIPS 2016) |
| # | Model | Accuracy ↑ | Paper |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | WL-MLP | 0.9954 | |
| 2 | GIN | 0.9934 | |
| 3 | GCN | 0.9727 best reported | best at pub: Hierarchical Graph Capsule Network (AAAI 2020) best today: 1-WL Expressiveness Is (Almost) All You Need (2022) |
| 12 | WL | 0.8590
±0.0010 best reported | best at pub: Propagation Kernels (2014) |
| 92 | GIN-0 | 0.8270
±0.0170 | This paper |
| 94 | GIN-ε | 0.8270
±0.0160 | This paper |
| 104 | GraphCL | 0.7790
±0.0040 | prev best: Graph Contrastive Learning Automated (ICML 2021) best today: Label-invariant Augmentation for Semi-Supervised Graph Classification (NeurIPS 2022) Improvement within reported uncertainty; not highlighted. |
| 131 | GraphSAGE | 0.8200
±0.0100 best reported | best at pub: Graph Neural Tangent Kernel: Fusing Graph Neural Networks with Graph Kernels (NeurIPS 2019) best today: Weisfeiler and Leman Go Infinite: Spectral and Combinatorial Pre-Colorings (TMLR 2022) |
| 210 | DGK | 0.8031
±0.0046 best reported | best at pub: Graph Capsule Convolutional Neural Networks (ICML 2018) best today: Model-Driven Graph Contrastive Learning (2025) Difference within reported uncertainty; not counted as underperformance. |
| 257 | GCKN | 0.7920
±0.0120 best reported | best today: KerGNNs: Interpretable Graph Neural Networks with Graph Kernels (AAAI 2022) |
| 273 | PGCL | 0.7880
±0.0080 | This paper |
| 338 | InfoGraph | 0.7750
±0.0074 best reported | best at pub: CogDL: A Comprehensive Library for Graph Deep Learning (WWW 2021) best today: Graph Masked Autoencoders with Transformers (2022) |
| 356 | MVGRL | 0.7700
±0.0080 best reported | best today: Graph Self-Supervised Learning with Learnable Structural and Positional Encodings (WWW 2025) |
| 406 | graph2vec | 0.7540
±0.0120 best reported | best at pub: Graph Contrastive Learning Automated (ICML 2021) best today: InfoGCL: Information-Aware Graph Contrastive Learning (NeurIPS 2021) Difference within reported uncertainty; not counted as underperformance. |
| 478 | GL | 0.7050
±0.0020 best reported | best at pub: On Valid Optimal Assignment Kernels and Applications to Graph Classification (NeurIPS 2016) |
| 512 | GCC | 0.6690
±0.0020 | This paper |
| # | Model | Accuracy ↑ | Paper |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | WL-MLP | 0.9792 | |
| 2 | MSH-GNN | 0.9640
±0.0070 | |
| 3 | CoCN | 0.8722
±0.0013 | |
| 23 | GCN | 0.8260
±0.0220 best reported | best at pub: Fast Graph Representation Learning with PyTorch Geometric (ICLR 2019) best today: Scalable Expressiveness through Preprocessed Graph Perturbations (2024) |
| 30 | GIN | 0.8220
±0.0210 | |
| 75 | GCC | 0.8110 best reported | best at pub: Graph Self-Supervised Learning: A Survey (2021) |
| 80 | GraphCL | 0.8108
±0.0017 best reported | best today: Label-invariant Augmentation for Semi-Supervised Graph Classification (NeurIPS 2022) |
| 104 | MVGRL | 0.8048
±0.0029 best reported | best today: Graph Contrastive Learning with Cohesive Subgraph Awareness (WWW 2024) |
| 112 | GIN-0 | 0.8020
±0.0190 | This paper |
| 120 | GIN-ε | 0.8010
±0.0190 | prev best: Fast Graph Representation Learning with PyTorch Geometric (ICLR 2019) Improvement within reported uncertainty; not highlighted. |
| 146 | InfoGraph | 0.7940 best reported | best at pub: CogDL: A Comprehensive Library for Graph Deep Learning (WWW 2021) |
| 151 | MLP | 0.7920
±0.0240 | |
| 228 | PGCL | 0.7600
±0.0030 | This paper |
| 260 | GCKN | 0.7430
±0.0280 best reported | best today: KerGNNs: Interpretable Graph Neural Networks with Graph Kernels (AAAI 2022) |
| 321 | GL | 0.6470
±0.0010 best reported | best at pub: On Valid Optimal Assignment Kernels and Applications to Graph Classification (NeurIPS 2016) |
| # | Model | Accuracy ↑ | Paper |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | OEPG | 0.9630
±0.0090 | |
| 2 | MSH-GNN | 0.9580
±0.0090 | |
| 3 | GNN-AK+ | 0.9480
±0.0080 | |
| 12 | GIN-0 | 0.9240
±0.0250 | This paper |
| 13 | GIN | 0.9240
±0.0250 | |
| 19 | GIN-ε | 0.9220
±0.0230 | This paper |
| 23 | GraphCL | 0.9169
±0.0070 best reported | best at pub: Graph Contrastive Learning Automated (ICML 2021) best today: Graph Contrastive Learning with Cohesive Subgraph Awareness (WWW 2024) |
| 25 | PGCL | 0.9150
±0.0070 | This paper |
| 42 | GCC | 0.8980 best reported | best at pub: Graph Self-Supervised Learning: A Survey (2021) |
| 46 | InfoGraph | 0.8939
±0.0181 best reported | best at pub: Graph Self-Supervised Learning: A Survey (2021) best today: Graph Contrastive Learning with Cohesive Subgraph Awareness (WWW 2024) |
| 65 | MVGRL | 0.8450
±0.0060 | This paper |
| 73 | DGK | 0.7804
±0.0039 best reported | best at pub: Graph Contrastive Learning Automated (ICML 2021) best today: Model-Driven Graph Contrastive Learning (2025) Difference within reported uncertainty; not counted as underperformance. |
| 75 | GL | 0.7734
±0.0018 best reported | best at pub: Graph Contrastive Learning Automated (ICML 2021) best today: Model-Driven Graph Contrastive Learning (2025) Difference within reported uncertainty; not counted as underperformance. |
| 80 | graph2vec | 0.7580
±0.0100 | prev best: Graph Contrastive Learning Automated (ICML 2021) Improvement within reported uncertainty; not highlighted. |
| 84 | GCN | 0.7060
±0.0369 best reported | best today: Motif-driven Subgraph Structure Learning for Graph Classification (2024) |
| 85 | WL | 0.6882
±0.0041 best reported | best at pub: Graph Contrastive Learning Automated (ICML 2021) best today: Model-Driven Graph Contrastive Learning (2025) Difference within reported uncertainty; not counted as underperformance. |
| 87 | MLG | 0.6330
±0.0150 | This paper |
| 88 | GCKN | 0.5840
±0.0760 | This paper |
