Contrastive Laplacian Eigenmaps
Abstract
Graph contrastive learning attracts/disperses node representations for similar/dissimilar node pairs under some notion of similarity. It may be combined with a low-dimensional embedding of nodes to preserve intrinsic and structural properties of a graph. In this paper, we extend the celebrated Laplacian Eigenmaps with contrastive learning, and call them COntrastive Laplacian EigenmapS (COLES). Starting from a GAN-inspired contrastive formulation, we show that the Jensen-Shannon divergence underlying many contrastive graph embedding models fails under disjoint positive and negative distributions, which may naturally emerge during sampling in the contrastive setting. In contrast, we demonstrate analytically that COLES essentially minimizes a surrogate of Wasserstein distance, which is known to cope well under disjoint distributions. Moreover, we show that the loss of COLES belongs to the family of so-called block-contrastive losses, previously shown to be superior compared to pair-wise losses typically used by contrastive methods. We show on popular benchmarks/backbones that COLES offers favourable accuracy/scalability compared to DeepWalk, GCN, Graph2Gauss, DGI and GRACE baselines.
Benchmark Results
Tested on 4 datasets 14 baseline values reported too low
Tables show presented results in global context (best 3 papers + GCN + MLP).
Classic
| # | Model | Accuracy ↑ | Paper |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | GraphSAGE+CNA | 0.9418
±0.0033 | |
| 2 | GCN+CNA | 0.9366
±0.0048 | |
| 3 | TransformerConv | 0.9350
±0.0058 | |
| 21 | GCN | 0.9004 best reported | best at pub: SplineCNN: Fast Geometric Deep Learning with Continuous B-Spline Kernels (2017) best today: Understanding Heterophily for Graph Neural Networks (ICML 2024) |
| 39 | SAGE | 0.8911
±0.0012 | |
| 44 | GAT | 0.8897
±0.0014 best reported | best at pub: Learned Low Precision Graph Neural Networks (2020) |
| 112 | S2GC | 0.8773
±0.0290 best reported | |
| 113 | MixHop | 0.8761
±0.0203 best reported | best at pub: Power up! Robust Graph Convolutional Network via Graph Powering (AAAI 2019) |
| 134 | GRACE | 0.8720
±0.0020 best reported | best at pub: Rethinking the Promotion Brought by Contrastive Learning to Semi-Supervised Node Classification (IJCAI 2020) best today: Oversmoothing: A Nightmare for Graph Contrastive Learning? (2023) |
| 177 | DGI | 0.8630
±0.0020 best reported | best at pub: Deep Learning on Graphs: A Survey (2018) best today: Oversmoothing: A Nightmare for Graph Contrastive Learning? (2023) |
| 223 | SGC | 0.8509
±0.0648 best reported | best at pub: Learning Conjoint Attentions for Graph Neural Nets (NeurIPS 2021) |
| 278 | GraphCL | 0.8428
±0.0091 best reported | best at pub: Rethinking the Promotion Brought by Contrastive Learning to Semi-Supervised Node Classification (IJCAI 2020) best today: Decoupled Self-supervised Learning for Non-Homophilou Graphs (2022) |
| 415 | GCA | 0.8310
±0.0030 best reported | best today: Graph Contrastive Learning with Implicit Augmentations (2022) |
| 435 | DeepWalk | 0.8290 best reported | best at pub: Graph Representation Learning: A Survey (2019) |
| 576 | COLES-S2GC | 0.8150
±0.0120 | This paper |
| 596 | PCA-S2GC | 0.8120
±0.0130 | This paper |
| 609 | COLES-GCN | 0.8100
±0.0130 | This paper |
| 650 | SCE | 0.8020
±0.0110 | This paper |
| 713 | RP-S2GC | 0.7810
±0.0120 | This paper |
| 724 | MLP | 0.7768 | |
| 757 | Graph2Gauss | 0.7620
±0.0110 | This paper |
| 785 | GCN with SampledNCE | 0.7430
±0.0160 | This paper |
| 790 | SAGE with SampledNCE | 0.7380
±0.0150 | This paper |
| # | Model | Accuracy ↑ | Paper |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | CNA | 0.9575
±0.0058 | |
| 2 | IS-GIB | 0.9390
±0.0187 | |
| 3 | EERM | 0.9112
±0.0145 | |
| 35 | GAT | 0.8080
±0.0026 best reported | best at pub: Gophormer: Ego-Graph Transformer for Node Classification (2021) best today: Feature Expansion for Graph Neural Networks (ICML 2023) |
| 44 | GCN | 0.8033
±0.0088 best reported | best at pub: Gophormer: Ego-Graph Transformer for Node Classification (2021) |
| 61 | GraphSAGE | 0.7923
±0.0053 | |
| 66 | DGI | 0.7890
±0.0020 best reported | best at pub: Deep Learning on Graphs: A Survey (2018) best today: Oversmoothing: A Nightmare for Graph Contrastive Learning? (2023) |
| 96 | SGC | 0.7765
±0.0012 best reported | best at pub: Deep Learning on Graphs: A Survey (2018) |
| 126 | MixHop | 0.7626
±0.0295 best reported | |
| 201 | GRACE | 0.7450
±0.0010 best reported | best at pub: Contrastive and Generative Graph Convolutional Networks for Graph-based Semi-Supervised Learning (AAAI 2020) best today: Oversmoothing: A Nightmare for Graph Contrastive Learning? (2023) |
| 350 | MLP | 0.7289
±0.0010 | |
| 395 | GraphCL | 0.7110
±0.0080 | prev best: Rethinking the Promotion Brought by Contrastive Learning to Semi-Supervised Node Classification (IJCAI 2020) Improvement within reported uncertainty; not highlighted. |
| 489 | COLES-GCN | 0.7170
±0.0090 | This paper |
| 505 | GCA | 0.7150
±0.0030 best reported | |
| 532 | COLES-S2GC | 0.7130
±0.0100 | This paper |
| 580 | SCE | 0.7070
±0.0120 | This paper |
| 638 | S2GC | 0.6950
±0.0120 | This paper |
| 660 | PCA-S2GC | 0.6880
±0.0130 | This paper |
| 692 | DeepWalk | 0.6785
±0.0079 best reported | best at pub: Graph-MLP: Node Classification without Message Passing in Graph (2021) best today: Decoupled Self-supervised Learning for Non-Homophilou Graphs (2022) |
| 761 | Graph2Gauss | 0.6570
±0.0150 | This paper |
| 816 | RP-S2GC | 0.6170
±0.0160 | This paper |
| 850 | GCN with SampledNCE | 0.5680
±0.0190 | This paper |
| 852 | SAGE with SampledNCE | 0.5650
±0.0160 | This paper |
| # | Model | Accuracy ↑ | Paper |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | LGTL | 0.9518
±0.0011 | |
| 2 | MixHop (LO) | 0.9513
±0.0038 | |
| 3 | GraphSAGE (LO) | 0.9511
±0.0036 | |
| 18 | GCN | 0.9296
±0.0015 best reported | best at pub: Tackling Over-Smoothing for General Graph Convolutional Networks (2020) |
| 20 | GAT | 0.9233
±0.0018 best reported | best at pub: Tackling Over-Smoothing for General Graph Convolutional Networks (2020) |
| 70 | MixHop | 0.9004
±0.0141 best reported | best at pub: Power up! Robust Graph Convolutional Network via Graph Powering (AAAI 2019) best today: Language is All a Graph Needs (2023) |
| 116 | SAGE | 0.8881
±0.0015 | |
| 141 | SGC | 0.8832
±0.0055 best reported | best at pub: Learning Conjoint Attentions for Graph Neural Nets (NeurIPS 2021) |
| 204 | DGI | 0.8708
±0.0017 best reported | |
| 210 | MLP | 0.8690
±0.0074 | |
| 223 | DeepWalk | 0.7080
±0.0260 | prev best: GraphZoom: A Multi-level Spectral Approach for Accurate and Scalable Graph Embedding (ICLR 2019) best today: Node Representation Learning in Graph via Node-to-Neighbourhood Mutual Information Maximization (2022) Improvement within reported uncertainty; not highlighted. |
| 719 | COLES-S2GC | 0.7740
±0.0190 | This paper |
| 777 | SCE | 0.7580
±0.0220 | This paper |
| 804 | SAGE with SampledNCE | 0.7460
±0.0190 | This paper |
| 809 | Graph2Gauss | 0.7410
±0.0210 | This paper |
| 814 | S2GC | 0.7330
±0.0200 | This paper |
| 816 | PCA-S2GC | 0.7320
±0.0200 | This paper |
| 821 | RP-S2GC | 0.7250
±0.0190 | This paper |
| 836 | GCN with SampledNCE | 0.7030
±0.0250 | This paper |
Default metric is F1. The paper reports 3 values on F1 and 2 values on Micro-F1 .
| # | Model | F1 ↑ default | Micro-F1 ↑ | Paper |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | EnGCN | 0.9714
±
0.0003 | — | |
| 2 | SAGN+SLE | 0.9710
±
0.0000 | — | |
| 3 | GAMLP(JK) | 0.9704
±
0.0001 | — | Micro-F1
— |
| 14 | GraphSAGE | 0.9660 | — | |
| 53 | COLES-S²GC | —
| 0.9540 | Micro-F1
0.9540 |
| 55 | SAGE-LSTM | 0.9540 | — | Micro-F1
— |
| 71 | SAGE-mean | 0.9500 | — | Micro-F1
— |
| 87 | COLES-GCN | —
| 0.9400 | Micro-F1
0.9400 |
| 109 | SAGE-GCN | 0.9300 | — | Micro-F1
— |
