Cell Attention Networks
Abstract
Since their introduction, graph attention networks achieved outstanding results in graph representation learning tasks. However, these networks consider only pairwise relationships among nodes and then they are not able to fully exploit higher-order interactions present in many real world data-sets. In this paper, we introduce Cell Attention Networks (CANs), a neural architecture operating on data defined over the vertices of a graph, representing the graph as the 1-skeleton of a cell complex introduced to capture higher order interactions. In particular, we exploit the lower and upper neighborhoods, as encoded in the cell complex, to design two independent masked self-attention mechanisms, thus generalizing the conventional graph attention strategy. The approach used in CANs is hierarchical and it incorporates the following steps: i) a lifting algorithm that learns edge features from node features; ii) a cell attention mechanism to find the optimal combination of edge features over both lower and upper neighbors; iii) a hierarchical edge pooling mechanism to extract a compact meaningful set of features. The experimental results show that CAN is a low complexity strategy that compares favorably with state of the art results on graph-based learning tasks.
Benchmark Results
Tested on 2 datasets 4 baseline values reported too low
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 | |
| 26 | CIN | 0.9440
±0.0370 best reported | best at pub: Weisfeiler and Lehman Go Cellular: CW Networks (NeurIPS 2021) best today: CIN++: Enhancing Topological Message Passing (2023) Difference within reported uncertainty; not counted as underperformance. |
| 29 | CAN | 0.9410
±0.0480 | This paper |
| 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. |
| 64 | GSN | 0.9220
±0.0750 | This paper |
| 63 | GCN | 0.9220
±0.0440 | |
| 139 | PPGNs | 0.9060
±0.0870 | This paper |
| 161 | WLK | 0.9040
±0.0570 | This paper |
| 240 | NGN | 0.8940
±0.0160 | This paper |
| 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. |
| 467 | PK | 0.8450
±0.0060 best reported | best at pub: Propagation Kernels (2014) |
| 492 | IGN | 0.8390
±0.0130 | This paper |
| 584 | GK (k=3) | 0.8140
±0.0170 | This paper |
| 643 | RWK | 0.7920
±0.0210 | This paper |
| # | Model | Accuracy ↑ | Paper |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | WL-MLP | 0.9954 | |
| 2 | GIN | 0.9934 best reported | best at pub: 1-WL Expressiveness Is (Almost) All You Need (2022) |
| 3 | GCN | 0.9727 | |
| 11 | WLK | 0.8600
±0.0180 | This paper |
| 19 | CIN | 0.8530
±0.0120 best reported | best at pub: Weisfeiler and Lehman Go Cellular: CW Networks (NeurIPS 2021) best today: Weisfeiler and Lehman Go Paths: Learning Topological Features via Path Complexes (AAAI 2023) Difference within reported uncertainty; not counted as underperformance. |
| 29 | CAN | 0.8450
±0.0160 | This paper |
| 28 | PK | 0.8450
±0.0010 best reported | best at pub: Propagation Kernels (2014) |
| 50 | GSN | 0.8350
±0.0200 | This paper |
| 64 | PPGNs | 0.8320
±0.0110 | This paper |
| 82 | SIN | 0.8280
±0.0220 best reported | best at pub: Weisfeiler and Lehman Go Topological: Message Passing Simplicial Networks (ICML 2021) Difference within reported uncertainty; not counted as underperformance. |
| 110 | NGN | 0.8240
±0.0130 | This paper |
| 131 | GraphSAGE | 0.8200
±0.0100 | |
| 373 | DGCNN | 0.7650
±0.0190 best reported | best at pub: GraphCrop: Subgraph Cropping for Graph Classification (2020) Difference within reported uncertainty; not counted as underperformance. |
| 428 | IGN | 0.7433
±0.0271 best reported | best at pub: Weisfeiler and Lehman Go Topological: Message Passing Simplicial Networks (ICML 2021) best today: Towards Better Graph Representation Learning with Parameterized Decomposition & Filtering (ICML 2023) Difference within reported uncertainty; not counted as underperformance. |
| 540 | DCNN | 0.6261 best reported | |
| 541 | GK (k=3) | 0.6250
±0.0030 | This paper |
