ICLR 2021

From Stars to Subgraphs: Uplifting Any GNN with Local Structure Awareness

Lingxiao Zhao, Wei Jin, L. Akoglu, Neil Shah

Main figure for From Stars to Subgraphs: Uplifting Any GNN with Local Structure Awareness

Abstract

Message Passing Neural Networks (MPNNs) are a common type of Graph Neural Network (GNN), in which each node's representation is computed recursively by aggregating representations (messages) from its immediate neighbors akin to a star-shaped pattern. MPNNs are appealing for being efficient and scalable, how-ever their expressiveness is upper-bounded by the 1st-order Weisfeiler-Lehman isomorphism test (1-WL). In response, prior works propose highly expressive models at the cost of scalability and sometimes generalization performance. Our work stands between these two regimes: we introduce a general framework to uplift any MPNN to be more expressive, with limited scalability overhead and greatly improved practical performance. We achieve this by extending local aggregation in MPNNs from star patterns to general subgraph patterns (e.g.,k-egonets):in our framework, each node representation is computed as the encoding of a surrounding induced subgraph rather than encoding of immediate neighbors only (i.e. a star). We choose the subgraph encoder to be a GNN (mainly MPNNs, considering scalability) to design a general framework that serves as a wrapper to up-lift any GNN. We call our proposed method GNN-AK(GNN As Kernel), as the framework resembles a convolutional neural network by replacing the kernel with GNNs. Theoretically, we show that our framework is strictly more powerful than 1&2-WL, and is not less powerful than 3-WL. We also design subgraph sampling strategies which greatly reduce memory footprint and improve speed while maintaining performance. Our method sets new state-of-the-art performance by large margins for several well-known graph ML tasks; specifically, 0.08 MAE on ZINC,74.79% and 86.887% accuracy on CIFAR10 and PATTERN respectively.

Benchmark Results

Tested on 5 datasets 1 baseline value reported too low

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

TU Dortmund

#ModelAccuracy ↑Paper
1
MSH-GNN
0.9910 ±0.0030
2
ID-GNN+BEC
0.9830 ±0.0360
3
SupCosine
0.9830 ±0.0250
26
CIN
actual #26 vs paper #48 22 places worse
0.9440 ±0.0370
best reported
actual #26 vs paper #48 22 places worse
paper 0.9270 ±0.0610

Difference within reported uncertainty; not counted as underperformance.

paper 0.9270 ±0.0610 Δ today 0.0170
39
GIN
0.9330 ±0.0290
64
GSN
0.9220 ±0.0750
This paper
103
GNN-AK+
0.9130 ±0.0700
This paper
139
PPGNs
0.9060 ±0.0870
This paper
164
WL kernel
0.9040 ±0.0570
This paper
244
Natural GN
0.8940 ±0.0160
This paper
403
MLP
0.8660 ±0.0495
425
DGCNN
actual #425 vs paper #425
0.8583 ±0.0116
best reported
actual #425 vs paper #425
paper 0.8580 ±0.0180

Difference within reported uncertainty; not counted as underperformance.

paper 0.8580 ±0.0180 Δ at pub 0.0003 Δ today 0.0003
#ModelAccuracy ↑Paper
1
WL-MLP
0.9954
2
GIN
0.9934
3
GCN
0.9727
22
GNN-AK+
0.8500 ±0.0200
This paper
131
GraphSAGE
0.8200 ±0.0100
#ModelAccuracy ↑Paper
1
MSH-GNN
0.9410 ±0.0330
2
GRDL
0.8260 ±0.0120
3
GMN
0.8225
32
GIN
0.7880 ±0.0410
74
PPGNs
0.7720 ±0.0470
This paper
80
GNN-AK+
0.7710 ±0.0570
This paper
149
MLP
0.7600 ±0.0320
252
WL kernel
actual #252 vs paper #252
0.7500 ±0.0310
actual #252 vs paper #252
paper 0.7500 ±0.0310

Improvement within reported uncertainty; not highlighted.

paper 0.7500 ±0.0310 Δ at pub 0.0208
#ModelAccuracy ↑Paper
1
OEPG
0.9630 ±0.0090
2
MSH-GNN
0.9580 ±0.0090
3
GNN-AK+
0.9480 ±0.0080
This paper
15
CIN
0.9240 ±0.0210
This paper
13
GIN
0.9240 ±0.0250
20
SIN
0.9220 ±0.0100
This paper

GNNBenchmark

#ModelAccuracy ↑Paper
1
RandAlign
0.7942 ±0.0007
2
differential encoding
0.7907 ±0.0027
3
PPGT
0.7856 ±0.0070
24
PNA*-AK+-S
0.7479 ±0.0018
This paper
38
PNA*
0.7311 ±0.0011
This paper
40
DGN
0.7284 ±0.0042
This paper
42
GCN-AK+
0.7270 ±0.0029
This paper
44
GIN-AK+
actual #44 vs paper #50 6 places worse
0.7239 ±0.0038
best reported
actual #44 vs paper #50 6 places worse
paper 0.7219 ±0.0013

Difference within reported uncertainty; not counted as underperformance.

paper 0.7219 ±0.0013 Δ today 0.0020
45
GIN-AK+-S
0.7239 ±0.0038
This paper
57
GCN-AK+-S
0.7193 ±0.0047
This paper
62
GatedGCN
actual #62 vs paper #75 13 places worse
0.7133 ±0.0039
best reported
actual #62 vs paper #75 13 places worse
paper 0.6937 ±0.0048
paper 0.6937 ±0.0048 Δ at pub 0.0196
92
GraphSAGE
0.6690 ±0.0020
122
GNN-AK+
0.5982 ±0.0033
This paper
124
GCN
actual #124 vs paper #124
0.5839 ±0.0073
actual #124 vs paper #124
paper 0.5839 ±0.0073
paper 0.5839 ±0.0073 Δ at pub 0.0268
126
MLP
0.5634 ±0.0018
SOTA performance (not significantly different from the best) Baseline / comparison (this paper) Global context (other papers) Best at pub — reported result worse than the best known when published (best reported in green) Best at pub — reported value improved over the best known when published