NeurIPS 2022

Does GNN Pretraining Help Molecular Representation?

Ruoxi Sun, Hanjun Dai, Adams Wei Yu

Main figure for Does GNN Pretraining Help Molecular Representation?

Abstract

Extracting informative representations of molecules using Graph neural networks (GNNs) is crucial in AI-driven drug discovery. Recently, the graph research community has been trying to replicate the success of self-supervised pretraining in natural language processing, with several successes claimed. However, we find the benefit brought by self-supervised pretraining on small molecular data can be negligible in many cases. We conduct thorough ablation studies on the key components of GNN pretraining, including pretraining objectives, data splitting methods, input features, pretraining dataset scales, and GNN architectures, to see how they affect the accuracy of the downstream tasks. Our first important finding is, self-supervised graph pretraining do not always have statistically significant advantages over non-pretraining methods in many settings. Secondly, although noticeable improvement can be observed with additional supervised pretraining, the improvement may diminish with richer features or more balanced data splits. Thirdly, hyper-parameters could have larger impacts on accuracy of downstream tasks than the choice of pretraining tasks, especially when the scales of downstream tasks are small. Finally, we provide our conjectures where the complexity of some pretraining methods on small molecules might be insufficient, followed by empirical evidences on different pretraining datasets.

Benchmark Results

Tested on 6 datasets

Tables show presented results in global context (best 3 papers + GCN + MLP).

MoleculeNet

#ModelROC-AUC ↑Paper
1
HIMP
0.8740 ±0.0050
2
GINE w/ VN
0.8720 ±0.0030
3
NaiveGINe+ K=3 w/ VN
0.8700 ±0.0040
14
GCN
0.8400 ±0.0040
34
Masking Node + Supervised
0.8193 ±0.0179
This paper
36
Context Prediction + Supervised
0.8171 ±0.0179
This paper
40
Supervised
0.8113 ±0.0239
This paper
73
Node Prediction
0.7957 ±0.0203
This paper
84
Motif Prediction
0.7922 ±0.0238
This paper
86
No pretrain
actual #86 vs paper #86
0.7920 ±0.0199
actual #86 vs paper #86
paper 0.7920 ±0.0199
paper 0.7920 ±0.0199 Δ at pub 0.0490
90
Context Prediction
0.7905 ±0.0251
This paper
107
Contrastive learning
0.7845 ±0.0244
This paper
#ModelROC-AUC ↑Paper
1
ProtoMol
0.9140 ±0.0030
2
MMSG
0.9080 ±0.0050
3
MemGNN
0.9070
11
Context Prediction + Supervised
0.8872 ±0.0168
This paper
22
No pretrain
actual #22 vs paper #22
0.8743 ±0.0163
actual #22 vs paper #22
paper 0.8743 ±0.0163
paper 0.8743 ±0.0163 Δ at pub 0.1743
23
Node Prediction
0.8732 ±0.0167
This paper
27
Motif Prediction
0.8716 ±0.0166
This paper
32
Context Prediction
0.8698 ±0.0126
This paper
33
Supervised
0.8691 ±0.0186
This paper
34
Masking Node + Supervised
0.8690 ±0.0204
This paper
40
Contrastive learning
0.8667 ±0.0240
This paper
43
GIN
0.8646 ±0.0081
#ModelROC-AUC ↑Paper
1
MAGPrompt+
0.9432 ±0.0238
2
CamS-LLaMA
0.9420
3
SE(3)-I MPPH
0.9400 ±0.0210
5
Masking Node + Supervised
0.9343 ±0.0250
This paper
11
Context Prediction
0.9268 ±0.0119
This paper
12
Motif Prediction
0.9263 ±0.0119
This paper
15
Contrastive learning
0.9231 ±0.0158
This paper
16
Context Prediction + Supervised
0.9227 ±0.0157
This paper
17
Node Prediction
0.9224 ±0.0276
This paper
18
No pretrain
actual #18 vs paper #18
0.9223 ±0.0307
actual #18 vs paper #18
paper 0.9223 ±0.0307
paper 0.9223 ±0.0307 Δ at pub 0.2673
23
Supervised
0.9165 ±0.0211
This paper
34
GIN
0.8875 ±0.0049
#ModelROC-AUC ↑Paper
1
SE(3)-I MPPH
0.9930 ±0.0040
2
KA-GCN
0.9920 ±0.0050
3
KA-GAT
0.9910 ±0.0050
19
GCN
0.9130 ±0.0170
28
No pretrain
actual #28 vs paper #28
0.8970 ±0.0093
actual #28 vs paper #28
paper 0.8970 ±0.0093
paper 0.8970 ±0.0093 Δ at pub 0.3150
#ModelROC-AUC ↑Paper
1
KA-GAT
0.8470 ±0.0020
2
KA-GCN
0.8420 ±0.0010
3
GraphKAN
0.8370 ±0.0010
44
Supervised
0.6534 ±0.0017
This paper
47
Context Prediction + Supervised
0.6519 ±0.0017
This paper
48
Node Prediction
0.6508 ±0.0012
This paper
60
Contrastive learning
0.6439 ±0.0063
This paper
64
Masking Node + Supervised
0.6406 ±0.0028
This paper
65
Motif Prediction
0.6405 ±0.0023
This paper
66
GIN
0.6403 ±0.0104
88
Context Prediction
0.6284 ±0.0046
This paper
101
No pretrain
actual #101 vs paper #101
0.6230 ±0.0114
actual #101 vs paper #101
paper 0.6230 ±0.0114
paper 0.6230 ±0.0114 Δ at pub 0.0510
#ModelROC-AUC ↑Paper
1
GeomGCL
0.7630
2
LiGhT DeepGPT
0.7570 ±0.0110
3
CoMPT
0.7550
14
GCN
0.7350 ±0.0020
20
Context Prediction + Supervised
0.7219 ±0.0079
This paper
23
Masking Node + Supervised
0.7166 ±0.0073
This paper
24
Supervised
0.7164 ±0.0046
This paper
39
Context Prediction
0.7018 ±0.0044
This paper
41
Node Prediction
0.6977 ±0.0013
This paper
46
No pretrain
actual #46 vs paper #46
0.6913 ±0.0055
actual #46 vs paper #46
paper 0.6913 ±0.0055
paper 0.6913 ±0.0055 Δ at pub 0.0583
48
Motif Prediction
0.6909 ±0.0007
This paper
55
Contrastive learning
0.6837 ±0.0080
This paper
SOTA performance (not significantly different from the best) Baseline / comparison (this paper) Global context (other papers) Best at pub — reported value improved over the best known when published