NeurIPS 2022

Revisiting Graph Contrastive Learning from the Perspective of Graph Spectrum

Nian Liu, Xiao Wang, Deyu Bo, Chuan Shi, Jian Pei

Main figure for Revisiting Graph Contrastive Learning from the Perspective of Graph Spectrum

Abstract

0 Graph Contrastive Learning (GCL), learning the node representations by augmenting graphs, has attracted considerable attentions. Despite the proliferation of various graph augmentation strategies, some fundamental questions still remain unclear: what information is essentially encoded into the learned representations by GCL? Are there some general graph augmentation rules behind different augmentations? If so, what are they and what insights can they bring? In this paper, we answer these questions by establishing the connection between GCL and graph spectrum. By an experimental investigation in spectral domain, we firstly find the General grAph augMEntation (GAME) rule for GCL, i.e., the difference of the high-frequency parts between two augmented graphs should be larger than that of low-frequency parts. This rule reveals the fundamental principle to revisit the current graph augmentations and design new effective graph augmentations. Then we theoretically prove that GCL is able to learn the invariance information by contrastive invariance theorem, together with our GAME rule, for the first time, we uncover that the learned representations by GCL essentially encode the low-frequency information, which explains why GCL works. Guided by this rule, we propose a spectral graph contrastive learning module (SpCo), which is a general and GCL-friendly plug-in. We combine it with different existing GCL models, and extensive experiments well demonstrate that it can further improve the performances of a wide variety of different GCL methods.

Benchmark Results

Tested on 2 datasets Non-standard metric on 2 datasets

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

Classic

CiteSeer

Global leaderboard →
Non-default metric. This paper reports F1-macro; the dataset default is Accuracy. Values below use F1-macro only.

Sorted by F1-macro. Highlighted rows are from other papers.

#ModelF1-macro ↑Paper
1
IDGL
0.6940 ±0.0040
2
GEN
0.6940 ±0.0140
3
GaGSL
0.6880 ±0.0090
4
CCA+SpCo
0.6850 ±0.0100
This paper
5
DGI+SpCo
0.6830 ±0.0050
This paper
6
GCN
0.6810 ±0.0050
This paper
7
CCA-SSG
0.6790 ±0.0100
This paper
8
GraphCL
0.6780 ±0.0100
This paper
9
DGI
0.6770 ±0.0090
This paper
10
GAT
0.6750 ±0.0020
This paper
11
MVGRL
0.6680 ±0.0070
This paper
14
GRACE+SpCo
0.6510 ±0.0080
This paper
13
GRACE
0.6510 ±0.0120
This paper
17
GCA
0.6280 ±0.0130
This paper

PubMed

Global leaderboard →

Default metric is Accuracy. The paper reports 0 values on Accuracy , 4 values on F1-macro and 7 values on Ma-F1 .

Sorted by F1-macro. Highlighted rows are from other papers.

#ModelAccuracy ↑ defaultF1-macro ↑Ma-F1 ↑Paper
1
CCA+SpCo
—
—
0.8130 ± 0.0030
Accuracy —
Ma-F1 0.8130 ± 0.0030
This paper
1
GCA
—
—
0.8080 ± 0.0060
Accuracy —
Ma-F1 0.8080 ± 0.0060
This paper
1
CCA-SSG
—
—
0.8070 ± 0.0060
Accuracy —
Ma-F1 0.8070 ± 0.0060
This paper
1
GRACE+SpCo
—
—
0.8030 ± 0.0030
Accuracy —
Ma-F1 0.8030 ± 0.0030
This paper
1
GRACE
—
—
0.8000 ± 0.0070
Accuracy —
Ma-F1 0.8000 ± 0.0070
This paper
1
MVGRL
—
—
0.7980 ± 0.0040
Accuracy —
Ma-F1 0.7980 ± 0.0040
This paper
1
GCN
—
0.7850 ± 0.0030
—
Accuracy —
Ma-F1 —
This paper
2
DGI+SpCo
—
0.7760 ± 0.0060
—
Accuracy —
Ma-F1 —
This paper
3
GAT
—
0.7740 ± 0.0020
—
Accuracy —
Ma-F1 —
This paper
4
GraphCL
—
—
0.7700 ± 0.0040
Accuracy —
Ma-F1 0.7700 ± 0.0040
This paper
4
DGI
—
0.7680 ± 0.0090
—
Accuracy —
Ma-F1 —
This paper
SOTA performance (not significantly different from the best) Proposed method (this paper) Baseline / comparison (this paper) Global context (other papers)