NeurIPS 2021

InfoGCL: Information-Aware Graph Contrastive Learning

Dongkuan Xu, Wei Cheng, Dongsheng Luo, Haifeng Chen, Xiang Zhang

Main figure for InfoGCL: Information-Aware Graph Contrastive Learning

Abstract

Various graph contrastive learning models have been proposed to improve the performance of learning tasks on graph datasets in recent years. While effective and prevalent, these models are usually carefully customized. In particular, although all recent researches create two contrastive views, they differ greatly in view augmentations, architectures, and objectives. It remains an open question how to build your graph contrastive learning model from scratch for particular graph learning tasks and datasets. In this work, we aim to fill this gap by studying how graph information is transformed and transferred during the contrastive learning process and proposing an information-aware graph contrastive learning framework called InfoGCL. The key point of this framework is to follow the Information Bottleneck principle to reduce the mutual information between contrastive parts while keeping task-relevant information intact at both the levels of the individual module and the entire framework so that the information loss during graph representation learning can be minimized. We show for the first time that all recent graph contrastive learning methods can be unified by our framework. We empirically validate our theoretical analysis on both node and graph classification benchmark datasets, and demonstrate that our algorithm significantly outperforms the state-of-the-arts.

Proposed method: InfoGCL

Benchmark Results

Tested on 3 datasets 8 baseline values 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
39
GIN
0.9330 ±0.0290
63
GCN
actual #63 vs paper #432 369 places worse
0.9220 ±0.0440
best reported
actual #63 vs paper #432 369 places worse
paper 0.8560 ±0.0580

Difference within reported uncertainty; not counted as underperformance.

paper 0.8560 ±0.0580 Δ at pub 0.0350 Δ today 0.0660
105
InfoGCL
0.9120 ±0.0130
This paper
159
WL
actual #159 vs paper #597 438 places worse
0.9040 ±0.0570
best reported
actual #159 vs paper #597 438 places worse
paper 0.8070 ±0.0300
paper 0.8070 ±0.0300 Δ at pub 0.0550 Δ today 0.0970
158
GraphSAGE
actual #158 vs paper #446 288 places worse
0.9040 ±0.0780
best reported
actual #158 vs paper #446 288 places worse
paper 0.8510 ±0.0760

Difference within reported uncertainty; not counted as underperformance.

paper 0.8510 ±0.0760 Δ at pub 0.0060 Δ today 0.0530
183
GAT
actual #183 vs paper #237 54 places worse
0.9010 ±0.0580
best reported
actual #183 vs paper #237 54 places worse
paper 0.8940 ±0.0610

Difference within reported uncertainty; not counted as underperformance.

paper 0.8940 ±0.0610 Δ at pub 0.0070 Δ today 0.0070
199
MVGRL
actual #199 vs paper #213 14 places worse
0.8993 ±0.0616
best reported
actual #199 vs paper #213 14 places worse
paper 0.8970 ±0.0110

Difference within reported uncertainty; not counted as underperformance.

paper 0.8970 ±0.0110 Δ today 0.0023
238
GIN-0
0.8940 ±0.0560
This paper
257
InfoGraph
actual #257 vs paper #272 15 places worse
0.8930 ±0.0514
best reported
actual #257 vs paper #272 15 places worse
paper 0.8900 ±0.0110
best at pub: Graph Contrastive Learning Automated (ICML 2021)

Difference within reported uncertainty; not counted as underperformance.

paper 0.8900 ±0.0110 Δ at pub 0.0001 Δ today 0.0030
273
GIN-e
0.8900 ±0.0600
This paper
332
MLG
actual #332 vs paper #334 2 places worse
0.8794 ±0.0161
best reported
actual #332 vs paper #334 2 places worse
paper 0.8790 ±0.0160
best at pub: The Multiscale Laplacian Graph Kernel (NeurIPS 2016)

Difference within reported uncertainty; not counted as underperformance.

paper 0.8790 ±0.0160 Δ at pub 0.0004
354
GraphCL
actual #354 vs paper #396 42 places worse
0.8766 ±0.0103
best reported
actual #354 vs paper #396 42 places worse
paper 0.8680 ±0.0130
best at pub: Graph Contrastive Learning Automated (ICML 2021)

Difference within reported uncertainty; not counted as underperformance.

paper 0.8680 ±0.0130 Δ today 0.0086
365
DGK
actual #365 vs paper #366 1 place worse
0.8744 ±0.0272
best reported
actual #365 vs paper #366 1 place worse
paper 0.8740 ±0.0270
best at pub: Provably Powerful Graph Networks (NeurIPS 2019)

Difference within reported uncertainty; not counted as underperformance.

paper 0.8740 ±0.0270 Δ at pub 0.0004 Δ today 0.0004
403
MLP
0.8660 ±0.0495
407
graph2vec
actual #407 vs paper #515 108 places worse
0.8644 ±0.0125
best reported
actual #407 vs paper #515 108 places worse
paper 0.8320 ±0.0960

Difference within reported uncertainty; not counted as underperformance.

paper 0.8320 ±0.0960 Δ at pub 0.0048 Δ today 0.0324
426
SP
actual #426 vs paper #443 17 places worse
0.8580 ±0.0020
best reported
actual #426 vs paper #443 17 places worse
paper 0.8520 ±0.0240
best at pub: Propagation Kernels (2014)

Difference within reported uncertainty; not counted as underperformance.

paper 0.8520 ±0.0240 Δ at pub 0.0060
472
Sub2Vec
actual #472 vs paper #786 314 places worse
0.8447 ±0.0037
best reported
actual #472 vs paper #786 314 places worse
paper 0.6110 ±0.1580

Difference within reported uncertainty; not counted as underperformance.

paper 0.6110 ±0.1580 Δ at pub 0.0050 Δ today 0.2337
500
random walk
0.8370 ±0.0150
This paper
506
GK
actual #506 vs paper #575 69 places worse
0.8350 ±0.0060
best reported
actual #506 vs paper #575 69 places worse
paper 0.8170 ±0.0210

Difference within reported uncertainty; not counted as underperformance.

paper 0.8170 ±0.0210 Δ today 0.0180
746
Node2Vec
actual #746 vs paper #746
0.7263 ±0.1020
best reported
actual #746 vs paper #746
paper 0.7260 ±0.1020
best at pub: Graph Contrastive Learning Automated (ICML 2021)

Difference within reported uncertainty; not counted as underperformance.

paper 0.7260 ±0.1020 Δ at pub 0.0003 Δ today 0.0003
#ModelAccuracy ↑Paper
1
WL-MLP
0.9954
2
GIN
0.9934
3
GCN
actual #3 vs paper #214 211 places worse
0.9727
best reported
actual #3 vs paper #214 211 places worse
paper 0.8020 ±0.0200
best at pub: Hierarchical Graph Capsule Network (AAAI 2020)
paper 0.8020 ±0.0200 Δ at pub 0.0345 Δ today 0.1707
4
GAT
actual #4 vs paper #513 509 places worse
0.9623
best reported
actual #4 vs paper #513 509 places worse
paper 0.6660 ±0.0220
paper 0.6660 ±0.0220 Δ at pub 0.1180 Δ today 0.2963
12
WL
actual #12 vs paper #223 211 places worse
0.8590 ±0.0010
best reported
actual #12 vs paper #223 211 places worse
paper 0.8000 ±0.0050
best at pub: Propagation Kernels (2014)
paper 0.8000 ±0.0050 Δ at pub 0.0590
92
GIN-0
0.8270 ±0.0170
This paper
93
GIN-e
0.8270 ±0.0160
This paper
104
GraphCL
actual #104 vs paper #325 221 places worse
0.8250 ±0.0013
best reported
actual #104 vs paper #325 221 places worse
paper 0.7790 ±0.0040
paper 0.7790 ±0.0040 Δ today 0.0460
131
GraphSAGE
actual #131 vs paper #329 198 places worse
0.8200 ±0.0100
best reported
actual #131 vs paper #329 198 places worse
paper 0.7770 ±0.0150
145
MLG
actual #145 vs paper #184 39 places worse
0.8175 ±0.0024
best reported
actual #145 vs paper #184 39 places worse
paper 0.8080 ±0.0130
best at pub: The Multiscale Laplacian Graph Kernel (NeurIPS 2016)

Difference within reported uncertainty; not counted as underperformance.

paper 0.8080 ±0.0130 Δ at pub 0.0095 Δ today 0.0095
210
DGK
actual #210 vs paper #211 1 place worse
0.8031 ±0.0046
best reported
actual #210 vs paper #211 1 place worse
paper 0.8030 ±0.0050

Difference within reported uncertainty; not counted as underperformance.

paper 0.8030 ±0.0050 Δ at pub 0.0001 Δ today 0.0001
215
InfoGCL
0.8020 ±0.0060
This paper
338
InfoGraph
actual #338 vs paper #386 48 places worse
0.7750 ±0.0074
best reported
actual #338 vs paper #386 48 places worse
paper 0.7620 ±0.0140

Difference within reported uncertainty; not counted as underperformance.

paper 0.7620 ±0.0140 Δ at pub 0.0044 Δ today 0.0130
356
MVGRL
actual #356 vs paper #356
0.7700 ±0.0080
actual #356 vs paper #356
paper 0.7700 ±0.0080
paper 0.7700 ±0.0080 Δ at pub 0.0200
406
graph2vec
actual #406 vs paper #406
0.7540 ±0.0120
actual #406 vs paper #406
paper 0.7540 ±0.0120

Improvement within reported uncertainty; not highlighted.

paper 0.7540 ±0.0120 Δ at pub 0.0218
421
SP
actual #421 vs paper #442 21 places worse
0.7450 ±0.0030
best reported
actual #421 vs paper #442 21 places worse
paper 0.7350 ±0.0010
paper 0.7350 ±0.0010 Δ at pub 0.0100
519
GK
actual #519 vs paper #519
0.6600 ±0.0010
actual #519 vs paper #519
paper 0.6600 ±0.0010
prev best: Implicit Graph Neural Networks (NeurIPS 2020)
paper 0.6600 ±0.0010 Δ at pub 0.0350
532
random walk
0.6430 ±0.0030
This paper
557
Sub2Vec
actual #557 vs paper #575 18 places worse
0.5976 ±0.0035
best reported
actual #557 vs paper #575 18 places worse
paper 0.5280 ±0.0150
best at pub: Graph Contrastive Learning Automated (ICML 2021)
paper 0.5280 ±0.0150 Δ at pub 0.0004 Δ today 0.0696
571
Node2Vec
actual #571 vs paper #571
0.5490 ±0.0160
actual #571 vs paper #571
paper 0.5490 ±0.0160

Improvement within reported uncertainty; not highlighted.

paper 0.5490 ±0.0160 Δ at pub 0.0001
#ModelAccuracy ↑Paper
1
WL-MLP
0.9792
2
MSH-GNN
0.9640 ±0.0070
3
CoCN
0.8722 ±0.0013
23
GCN
actual #23 vs paper #156 133 places worse
0.8260 ±0.0220
best reported
actual #23 vs paper #156 133 places worse
paper 0.7900 ±0.0180
paper 0.7900 ±0.0180 Δ at pub 0.0160 Δ today 0.0360
30
GIN
0.8220 ±0.0210
80
GraphCL
actual #80 vs paper #289 209 places worse
0.8108 ±0.0017
best reported
actual #80 vs paper #289 209 places worse
paper 0.7140 ±0.0120
paper 0.7140 ±0.0120 Δ today 0.0968
104
MVGRL
actual #104 vs paper #227 123 places worse
0.7600 ±0.0120
actual #104 vs paper #227 123 places worse
paper 0.7600 ±0.0120
paper 0.7600 ±0.0120 Δ at pub 0.0710 Δ today 0.0448
112
GIN-0
0.8020 ±0.0190
This paper
119
GIN-e
0.8010 ±0.0190
This paper
126
InfoGCL
actual #126 vs paper #126
0.8001 ±0.0132
best reported
actual #126 vs paper #126
paper 0.8000 ±0.0130

Difference within reported uncertainty; not counted as underperformance.

paper 0.8000 ±0.0130 Δ today 0.0001
136
GraphSAGE
actual #136 vs paper #308 172 places worse
0.7970 ±0.0170
best reported
actual #136 vs paper #308 172 places worse
paper 0.6830 ±0.0420
paper 0.6830 ±0.0420 Δ at pub 0.1140 Δ today 0.1140
146
InfoGraph
actual #146 vs paper #294 148 places worse
0.7940
best reported
actual #146 vs paper #294 148 places worse
paper 0.7070 ±0.0110
paper 0.7070 ±0.0110 Δ at pub 0.0870
151
MLP
0.7920 ±0.0240
153
WL
actual #153 vs paper #161 8 places worse
0.7910 ±0.0010
best reported
actual #153 vs paper #161 8 places worse
paper 0.7890 ±0.0190

Difference within reported uncertainty; not counted as underperformance.

paper 0.7890 ±0.0190 Δ at pub 0.0020
155
GAT
actual #155 vs paper #312 157 places worse
0.7908 ±0.0136
best reported
actual #155 vs paper #312 157 places worse
paper 0.6740 ±0.0290
paper 0.6740 ±0.0290 Δ at pub 0.0840 Δ today 0.1168
274
DGK
0.7310 ±0.0030
This paper
277
GK
actual #277 vs paper #278 1 place worse
0.7284 ±0.0028
best reported
actual #277 vs paper #278 1 place worse
paper 0.7280 ±0.0030
best today: Anonymous Walk Embeddings (ICML 2018)

Difference within reported uncertainty; not counted as underperformance.

paper 0.7280 ±0.0030 Δ at pub 0.0004 Δ today 0.0004
341
Node2Vec
0.5610 ±0.0020
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 result worse than the best known when published (best reported in green) 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