ICML 2022

Molecular Representation Learning via Heterogeneous Motif Graph Neural Networks

Zhaoning Yu, Hongyang Gao

Main figure for Molecular Representation Learning via Heterogeneous Motif Graph Neural Networks

Abstract

We consider feature representation learning problem of molecular graphs. Graph Neural Networks have been widely used in feature representation learning of molecular graphs. However, most existing methods deal with molecular graphs individually while neglecting their connections, such as motif-level relationships. We propose a novel molecular graph representation learning method by constructing a heterogeneous motif graph to address this issue. In particular, we build a heterogeneous motif graph that contains motif nodes and molecular nodes. Each motif node corresponds to a motif extracted from molecules. Then, we propose a Heterogeneous Motif Graph Neural Network (HM-GNN) to learn feature representations for each node in the heterogeneous motif graph. Our heterogeneous motif graph also enables effective multi-task learning, especially for small molecular datasets. To address the potential efficiency issue, we propose to use an edge sampler, which can significantly reduce computational resources usage. The experimental results show that our model consistently outperforms previous state-of-the-art models. Under multi-task settings, the promising performances of our methods on combined datasets shed light on a new learning paradigm for small molecular datasets. Finally, we show that our model achieves similar performances with significantly less computational resources by using our edge sampler.

Benchmark Results

Tested on 5 datasets

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
9
novel method to learn motif-level feature embedding
0.9630 ±0.0260
This paper
39
GIN
0.9330 ±0.0290
64
GSN
actual #64 vs paper #137 73 places worse
0.9220 ±0.0750
best reported
actual #64 vs paper #137 73 places worse
paper 0.9060 ±0.0750

Difference within reported uncertainty; not counted as underperformance.

paper 0.9060 ±0.0750 Δ at pub 0.0160 Δ today 0.0160
86
GraphNorm
0.9160 ±0.0650
This paper
118
WEGL
actual #118 vs paper #318 200 places worse
0.9100 ±0.0340
best reported
actual #118 vs paper #318 200 places worse
paper 0.8830 ±0.0510

Difference within reported uncertainty; not counted as underperformance.

paper 0.8830 ±0.0510 Δ today 0.0270
301
CapsGNN
actual #301 vs paper #400 99 places worse
0.8670 ±0.0690
actual #301 vs paper #400 99 places worse
paper 0.8670 ±0.0690

Improvement within reported uncertainty; not highlighted.

paper 0.8670 ±0.0690 Δ at pub 0.0003
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 ±0.0170

Difference within reported uncertainty; not counted as underperformance.

paper 0.8580 ±0.0170 Δ at pub 0.0003 Δ today 0.0003
#ModelAccuracy ↑Paper
1
WL-MLP
0.9954
2
GIN
0.9934
3
GCN
0.9727
49
novel method to learn motif-level feature embedding
0.8360 ±0.0150
This paper
50
GSN
0.8350 ±0.0230
This paper
66
PPGN
0.8320 ±0.0110
This paper
131
GraphSAGE
0.8200 ±0.0100
159
GraphNorm
0.8140 ±0.0240
This paper
302
CapsGNN
actual #302 vs paper #302
0.7840 ±0.0160
actual #302 vs paper #302
paper 0.7840 ±0.0160
prev best: Hierarchical Graph Capsule Network (AAAI 2020)

Improvement within reported uncertainty; not highlighted.

paper 0.7840 ±0.0160 Δ at pub 0.0005
369
WEGL
0.7680 ±0.0170
This paper
#ModelAccuracy ↑Paper
1
MSH-GNN
0.9410 ±0.0330
2
GRDL
0.8260 ±0.0120
3
GMN
0.8225
20
HM-GNN
0.7990 ±0.0310
This paper
32
GIN
0.7880 ±0.0410
142
WEGL
0.7610 ±0.0330
This paper
149
MLP
0.7600 ±0.0320

OGB

#ModelROC-AUC ↑Paper
1
Multi-RF Fusion with Multi-GNN Blending
0.8476 ±0.0002
2
HyperFusion
0.8475 ±0.0003
3
PAS+FPs
0.8420 ±0.0015
9
GatedGCN
0.8090 ±0.0160
18
GSN
actual #18 vs paper #103 85 places worse
0.7790 ±0.0010
actual #18 vs paper #103 85 places worse
paper 0.7790 ±0.0010
paper 0.7790 ±0.0010 Δ at pub 0.0337 Δ today 0.0249
62
PNA
0.7905 ±0.0132
This paper
65
HM-GNN
0.7903 ±0.0092
This paper
109
GIN
0.7780 ±0.0182
184
GCN
actual #184 vs paper #203 19 places worse
0.7630 ±0.0030
best reported
actual #184 vs paper #203 19 places worse
paper 0.7599 ±0.0119

Difference within reported uncertainty; not counted as underperformance.

paper 0.7599 ±0.0119 Δ at pub 0.0015 Δ today 0.0031
#ModelAP ↑Paper
1
GRPE-Large
0.3150 ±0.0010
2
Graphormer
0.3140
3
Graphormer-FLAG
0.3139 ±0.0032
31
GIN
0.2902 ±0.0017
34
HM-GNN
0.2870 ±0.0026
This paper
SOTA performance (not significantly different from the best) Proposed method (this paper) Baseline / comparison (this paper) Global context (other papers) Improved at pub — later paper surpassed this result