How Powerful are $K$-hop Message Passing Graph Neural Networks
Abstract
The most popular design paradigm for Graph Neural Networks (GNNs) is 1-hop message passing---aggregating information from 1-hop neighbors repeatedly. However, the expressive power of 1-hop message passing is bounded by the Weisfeiler-Lehman (1-WL) test. Recently, researchers extended 1-hop message passing to $K$-hop message passing by aggregating information from $K$-hop neighbors of nodes simultaneously. However, there is no work on analyzing the expressive power of $K$-hop message passing. In this work, we theoretically characterize the expressive power of $K$-hop message passing. Specifically, we first formally differentiate two different kernels of $K$-hop message passing which are often misused in previous works. We then characterize the expressive power of $K$-hop message passing by showing that it is more powerful than 1-WL and can distinguish almost all regular graphs. Despite the higher expressive power, we show that $K$-hop message passing still cannot distinguish some simple regular graphs and its expressive power is bounded by 3-WL. To further enhance its expressive power, we introduce a KP-GNN framework, which improves $K$-hop message passing by leveraging the peripheral subgraph information in each hop. We show that KP-GNN can distinguish many distance regular graphs which could not be distinguished by previous distance encoding or 3-WL methods. Experimental results verify the expressive power and effectiveness of KP-GNN. KP-GNN achieves competitive results across all benchmark datasets.
Benchmark Results
Tested on 3 datasets
Tables show presented results in global context (best 3 papers + GCN + MLP).
TU Dortmund
| # | Model | Accuracy ↑ | 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 best reported | best at pub: ProtGNN: Towards Self-Explaining Graph Neural Networks (AAAI 2021) Difference within reported uncertainty; not counted as underperformance. |
| 63 | GCN | 0.9220
±0.0440 | |
| 159 | WL | 0.9040
±0.0570 | prev best: Understanding Isomorphism Bias in Graph Data Sets (2019) Improvement within reported uncertainty; not highlighted. |
| 403 | MLP | 0.8660
±0.0495 | |
| 425 | DGCNN | 0.8583
±0.0116 best reported | best at pub: Deep Learning on Attributed Graphs: A Journey from Graphs to Their Embeddings and Back (2018) best today: Graph Structure Refinement with Energy-based Contrastive Learning (AAAI 2024) Difference within reported uncertainty; not counted as underperformance. |
| # | Model | Accuracy ↑ | Paper |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | MSH-GNN | 0.9410
±0.0330 | |
| 2 | GRDL | 0.8260
±0.0120 | |
| 3 | GMN | 0.8225 | |
| 32 | GIN | 0.7880
±0.0410 best reported | best at pub: Breaking the Limits of Message Passing Graph Neural Networks (ICML 2021) best today: Permutation-Invariant graph partitioning: How graph neural networks capture structural interactions? (2023) Difference within reported uncertainty; not counted as underperformance. |
| 67 | SAGE | 0.7726
±0.0228 | |
| 132 | DGCNN | 0.7626 best reported | best at pub: Orthogonal Graph Neural Networks (AAAI 2021) Difference within reported uncertainty; not counted as underperformance. |
| 149 | MLP | 0.7600
±0.0320 | |
| 190 | WL | 0.7560
±0.0040 best reported | best at pub: On Valid Optimal Assignment Kernels and Applications to Graph Classification (NeurIPS 2016) Difference within reported uncertainty; not counted as underperformance. |
| # | Model | Accuracy ↑ | Paper |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | GC-GNN (GCN) | 0.9210
±0.0810 | |
| 2 | SUGAR | 0.8403
±0.0133 | |
| 3 | Ortho-g-U-Nets | 0.8387 | |
| 15 | SAGE | 0.8088
±0.0233 | |
| 25 | WL | 0.7978
±0.0036 best reported | best at pub: Dynamic Edge-Conditioned Filters in Convolutional Neural Networks on Graphs (2017) best today: Graph Learning with Distributional Edge Layouts (2024) Difference within reported uncertainty; not counted as underperformance. |
| 37 | DGCNN | 0.7937 best reported | best at pub: Deep Learning on Attributed Graphs: A Journey from Graphs to Their Embeddings and Back (2018) best today: Orthogonal Graph Neural Networks (AAAI 2021) Difference within reported uncertainty; not counted as underperformance. |
