AAAI 2021

GeomGCL: Geometric Graph Contrastive Learning for Molecular Property Prediction

Shuangli Li, Jingbo Zhou, Tong Xu, D. Dou, Hui Xiong

Main figure for GeomGCL: Geometric Graph Contrastive Learning for Molecular Property Prediction

Abstract

Recently many efforts have been devoted to applying graph neural networks (GNNs) to molecular property prediction which is a fundamental task for computational drug and material discovery. One of major obstacles to hinder the successful prediction of molecule property by GNNs is the scarcity of labeled data. Though graph contrastive learning (GCL) methods have achieved extraordinary performance with insufficient labeled data, most focused on designing data augmentation schemes for general graphs. However, the fundamental property of a molecule could be altered with the augmentation method (like random perturbation) on molecular graphs. Whereas, the critical geometric information of molecules remains rarely explored under the current GNN and GCL architectures. To this end, we propose a novel graph contrastive learning method utilizing the geometry of the molecule across 2D and 3D views, which is named GeomGCL. Specifically, we first devise a dual-view geometric message passing network (GeomMPNN) to adaptively leverage the rich information of both 2D and 3D graphs of a molecule. The incorporation of geometric properties at different levels can greatly facilitate the molecular representation learning. Then a novel geometric graph contrastive scheme is designed to make both geometric views collaboratively supervise each other to improve the generalization ability of GeomMPNN. We evaluate GeomGCL on various downstream property prediction tasks via a finetune process. Experimental results on seven real-life molecular datasets demonstrate the effectiveness of our proposed GeomGCL against state-of-the-art baselines.

Proposed method: GeomGCL

Benchmark Results

Tested on 7 datasets

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

MoleculeNet

#ModelROC-AUC ↑Paper
1
HIMP
0.8740 ±0.0050
2
GINE w/ VN
0.8720 ±0.0030
3
NaiveGINe+ K=3 w/ VN
0.8700 ±0.0040
7
GeomGCL
0.8500
This paper
10
DMPNN
0.8480
This paper
14
GCN
0.8400 ±0.0040
16
GeomMPNN
0.8380
This paper
17
CoMPT
0.8360
This paper
18
AttentiveFP
0.8350
This paper
20
MAT
0.8340
This paper
29
MoCL
0.8240
This paper
80
HMGNN
0.7940
This paper
81
InfoGraph
0.7930
This paper
121
DimeNet++
0.7800
This paper
158
SGCN
0.7690
This paper
#ModelROC-AUC ↑Paper
1
SE(3)-I MPPH
0.9930 ±0.0040
2
KA-GCN
0.9920 ±0.0050
3
KA-GAT
0.9910 ±0.0050
11
AttentiveFP
actual #11 vs paper #81 70 places worse
0.9330 ±0.0200
best reported
actual #11 vs paper #81 70 places worse
paper 0.8080
18
GeomGCL
0.9190
This paper
19
GCN
0.9130 ±0.0170
25
GeomMPNN
0.9000
This paper
26
MAT
0.8980
This paper
27
DMPNN
actual #27 vs paper #30 3 places worse
0.8970
best reported
actual #27 vs paper #30 3 places worse
paper 0.8860
paper 0.8860 Δ today 0.0110
41
CoMPT
0.8770
This paper
68
SGCN
0.8250
This paper
106
InfoGraph
actual #106 vs paper #106
0.7810
actual #106 vs paper #106
paper 0.7810
121
DimeNet++
0.7600
This paper
140
MoCL
0.7390
This paper
187
HMGNN
0.6800
This paper
#ModelROC-AUC ↑Paper
1
KA-GAT
0.8470 ±0.0020
2
KA-GCN
0.8420 ±0.0010
3
GraphKAN
0.8370 ±0.0010
54
GeomGCL
0.6480
This paper
66
GIN
0.6403 ±0.0104
73
GeomMPNN
0.6380
This paper
76
DMPNN
0.6370
This paper
86
MoCL
0.6290
This paper
94
CoMPT
0.6260
This paper
113
MAT
0.6190
This paper
126
DimeNet++
0.6150
This paper
152
HMGNN
0.6070
This paper
157
AttentiveFP
actual #157 vs paper #162 5 places worse
0.6060 ±0.0320
best reported
actual #157 vs paper #162 5 places worse
paper 0.6050

Difference within reported uncertainty; not counted as underperformance.

paper 0.6050 Δ at pub 0.0010 Δ today 0.0010
162
InfoGraph
actual #162 vs paper #206 44 places worse
0.5850
actual #162 vs paper #206 44 places worse
paper 0.5850
229
SGCN
0.5600
This paper
#ModelROC-AUC ↑Paper
1
GeomGCL
0.7630
This paper
2
LiGhT DeepGPT
0.7570 ±0.0110
3
CoMPT
0.7550
This paper
8
AttentiveFP
actual #8 vs paper #8
0.7430
actual #8 vs paper #8
paper 0.7430
10
DMPNN
0.7430
This paper
11
GeomMPNN
0.7430
This paper
16
MAT
0.7350
This paper
14
GCN
0.7350 ±0.0020
22
MoCL
0.7180
This paper
35
InfoGraph
0.7050
This paper
38
HMGNN
0.7020
This paper
98
SGCN
0.6560
This paper
116
DimeNet++
0.6450
This paper
#ModelRMSE ↓Paper
1
Graphormer-SPIS
0.4840 ±0.0050
2
Graphormer-SPD
0.4920 ±0.0040
3
conan-FGW
0.5140 ±0.0190
6
GeomMPNN
0.5550
This paper
7
GCN
0.5640 ±0.0150
9
GeomGCL
0.5750
This paper
10
AttentiveFP
actual #10 vs paper #10
0.5780
actual #10 vs paper #10
paper 0.5780
15
CoMPT
0.5890
This paper
24
MAT
0.6240
This paper
26
DimeNet++
0.6330
This paper
30
DMPNN
0.6470
This paper
36
HMGNN
0.7010
This paper
69
InfoGraph
0.9140
This paper
75
MoCL
0.9340
This paper
121
SGCN
1.3290
This paper
#ModelRMSE ↓Paper
1
SE(3)-I MPPH
0.3540 ±0.0530
2
ECFP-4 + RF
0.5600 ±0.0660
3
GPSE + GPS
0.6820
5
GeomGCL
0.8660
This paper
6
GeomMPNN
0.9130
This paper
10
DimeNet++
0.9780
This paper
13
AttentiveFP
actual #13 vs paper #13
1.0340
actual #13 vs paper #13
paper 1.0340
14
MAT
1.0590
This paper
15
DMPNN
1.0920
This paper
16
CoMPT
1.1030
This paper
18
HMGNN
1.2070
This paper
25
MoCL
1.4780
This paper
53
SGCN
2.0610
This paper
56
InfoGraph
2.1040
This paper
69
GIN
2.3460 ±0.1220
#ModelRMSE ↓Paper
1
MemGNN
0.5560 ±0.0230
2
ProtoS-L2
0.5800 ±0.0160
3
ProtoW-L2
0.6040 ±0.0140
7
GCN
0.6550 ±0.0360
10
GeomGCL
0.6610
This paper
15
GeomMPNN
0.6820
This paper
38
AttentiveFP
0.7380
This paper
40
DimeNet++
0.7420
This paper
44
CoMPT
0.7610
This paper
53
DMPNN
0.7770
This paper
56
MAT
0.7960
This paper
76
HMGNN
0.8760
This paper
92
MoCL
1.0510
This paper
99
InfoGraph
1.2880
This paper
104
SGCN
1.4880
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 value improved over the best known when published Improved at pub — later paper surpassed this result Best today — OK at publication; today's leaderboard best is elsewhere