NeurIPS 2022

Understanding and Extending Subgraph GNNs by Rethinking Their Symmetries

Fabrizio Frasca, Beatrice Bevilacqua, Michael M. Bronstein, Haggai Maron

Main figure for Understanding and Extending Subgraph GNNs by Rethinking Their Symmetries

Abstract

Subgraph GNNs are a recent class of expressive Graph Neural Networks (GNNs) which model graphs as collections of subgraphs. So far, the design space of possible Subgraph GNN architectures as well as their basic theoretical properties are still largely unexplored. In this paper, we study the most prominent form of subgraph methods, which employs node-based subgraph selection policies such as ego-networks or node marking and deletion. We address two central questions: (1) What is the upper-bound of the expressive power of these methods? and (2) What is the family of equivariant message passing layers on these sets of subgraphs?. Our first step in answering these questions is a novel symmetry analysis which shows that modelling the symmetries of node-based subgraph collections requires a significantly smaller symmetry group than the one adopted in previous works. This analysis is then used to establish a link between Subgraph GNNs and Invariant Graph Networks (IGNs). We answer the questions above by first bounding the expressive power of subgraph methods by 3-WL, and then proposing a general family of message-passing layers for subgraph methods that generalises all previous node-based Subgraph GNNs. Finally, we design a novel Subgraph GNN dubbed SUN, which theoretically unifies previous architectures while providing better empirical performance on multiple benchmarks.

Proposed method: SUN (EGO)

Benchmark Results

Tested on 2 datasets 2 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
22
GIN-AK+
actual #22 vs paper #100 78 places worse
0.9500 ±0.0610
best reported
actual #22 vs paper #100 78 places worse
paper 0.9130 ±0.0700

Difference within reported uncertainty; not counted as underperformance.

paper 0.9130 ±0.0700 Δ today 0.0370
39
GIN
0.9330 ±0.0290
49
SUN (GIN) (EGO)
0.9270 ±0.0580
This paper
107
DSS-GNN (GIN) (EGO+)
0.9110 ±0.0700
This paper
116
DropEdge
actual #116 vs paper #116
0.9100 ±0.0570
actual #116 vs paper #116
paper 0.9100 ±0.0570

Improvement within reported uncertainty; not highlighted.

paper 0.9100 ±0.0570 Δ at pub 0.0320
117
DS-GNN (GIN) (EGO+)
0.9100 ±0.0480
This paper
165
ID-GNN (GIN)
0.9040 ±0.0540
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
actual #2 vs paper #91 89 places worse
0.9934
best reported
actual #2 vs paper #91 89 places worse
paper 0.8270 ±0.0170
paper 0.8270 ±0.0170 Δ at pub 0.1664
3
GCN
0.9727
19
CIN
actual #19 vs paper #47 28 places worse
0.8530 ±0.0120
best reported
actual #19 vs paper #47 28 places worse
paper 0.8360 ±0.0140

Difference within reported uncertainty; not counted as underperformance.

paper 0.8360 ±0.0140 Δ today 0.0170
21
GIN-AK+
0.8500 ±0.0200
This paper
37
SUN (GIN) (NM)
0.8420 ±0.0150
This paper
44
DS-GNN (GIN) (ND)
0.8380 ±0.0240
This paper
47
DSS-GNN (GIN) (EGO+)
0.8370 ±0.0180
This paper
50
GSN
0.8350 ±0.0200
This paper
64
PPGNs
0.8320 ±0.0110
This paper
82
SIN
actual #82 vs paper #91 9 places worse
0.8280 ±0.0220
best reported
actual #82 vs paper #91 9 places worse
paper 0.8270 ±0.0210

Difference within reported uncertainty; not counted as underperformance.

paper 0.8270 ±0.0210 Δ at pub 0.0010
99
ID-GNN (GIN)
0.8260 ±0.0160
This paper
109
Natural GN
0.8240 ±0.0130
This paper
117
DropEdge
actual #117 vs paper #129 12 places worse
0.8230 ±0.0010
best reported
actual #117 vs paper #129 12 places worse
paper 0.8200 ±0.0260

Difference within reported uncertainty; not counted as underperformance.

paper 0.8200 ±0.0260 Δ at pub 0.0030
131
GraphSAGE
0.8200 ±0.0100
373
DGCNN
actual #373 vs paper #424 51 places worse
0.7650 ±0.0190
best reported
actual #373 vs paper #424 51 places worse
paper 0.7440 ±0.0050

Difference within reported uncertainty; not counted as underperformance.

paper 0.7440 ±0.0050 Δ at pub 0.0210
428
IGN
actual #428 vs paper #430 2 places worse
0.7433 ±0.0271
best reported
actual #428 vs paper #430 2 places worse
paper 0.7430 ±0.0270

Difference within reported uncertainty; not counted as underperformance.

paper 0.7430 ±0.0270 Δ today 0.0003
540
DCNN
actual #540 vs paper #566 26 places worse
0.6261
best reported
actual #540 vs paper #566 26 places worse
paper 0.5660 ±0.0100
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)