ICML 2022

Revisiting Over-smoothing and Over-squashing using Ollivier's Ricci Curvature

K. Nguyen, T. Nguyen, Nhat Ho, Khuong N. Nguyen, Hieu Nong, Vinh Phu Nguyen

Main figure for Revisiting Over-smoothing and Over-squashing using Ollivier's Ricci Curvature

Abstract

Graph Neural Networks (GNNs) had been demonstrated to be inherently susceptible to the problems of over-smoothing and over-squashing. These issues prohibit the ability of GNNs to model complex graph interactions by limiting their effectiveness in taking into account distant information. Our study reveals the key connection between the local graph geometry and the occurrence of both of these issues, thereby providing a unified framework for studying them at a local scale using the Ollivier-Ricci curvature. Specifically, we demonstrate that over-smoothing is linked to positive graph curvature while over-squashing is linked to negative graph curvature. Based on our theory, we propose the Batch Ollivier-Ricci Flow, a novel rewiring algorithm capable of simultaneously addressing both over-smoothing and over-squashing.

Proposed method: BORF

Benchmark Results

Tested on 4 datasets 3 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
39
GIN
0.9330 ±0.0290
403
MLP
0.8660 ±0.0495
577
BORF
actual #577 vs paper #593 16 places worse
0.8168 ±0.0796
best reported
actual #577 vs paper #593 16 places worse
paper 0.8080 ±0.0250

Difference within reported uncertainty; not counted as underperformance.

paper 0.8080 ±0.0250 Δ today 0.0088
605
FoSR
actual #605 vs paper #704 99 places worse
0.8040 ±0.0243
best reported
actual #605 vs paper #704 99 places worse
paper 0.7560 ±0.0170
paper 0.7560 ±0.0170 Δ today 0.0480
633
SDRF
actual #633 vs paper #674 41 places worse
0.7950 ±0.0260
best reported
actual #633 vs paper #674 41 places worse
paper 0.7730 ±0.0230

Difference within reported uncertainty; not counted as underperformance.

paper 0.7730 ±0.0230 Δ today 0.0220
691
None
actual #691 vs paper #705 14 places worse
0.7610 ±0.0310
best reported
actual #691 vs paper #705 14 places worse
paper 0.7550 ±0.0290

Difference within reported uncertainty; not counted as underperformance.

paper 0.7550 ±0.0290 Δ today 0.0060
#ModelAccuracy ↑Paper
1
MSH-GNN
0.9410 ±0.0330
2
GRDL
0.8260 ±0.0120
3
GMN
0.8225
32
GIN
0.7880 ±0.0410
149
MLP
0.7600 ±0.0320
235
FoSR
actual #235 vs paper #303 68 places worse
0.7511 ±0.0082
best reported
actual #235 vs paper #303 68 places worse
paper 0.7420 ±0.0080

Difference within reported uncertainty; not counted as underperformance.

paper 0.7420 ±0.0080 Δ at pub 0.0091
403
SDRF
actual #403 vs paper #403
0.7220 ±0.0090
actual #403 vs paper #403
paper 0.7220 ±0.0090

Improvement within reported uncertainty; not highlighted.

paper 0.7220 ±0.0090 Δ at pub 0.0128
434
BORF
0.7130 ±0.0100
This paper
443
None
actual #443 vs paper #447 4 places worse
0.7098 ±0.0074
best reported
actual #443 vs paper #447 4 places worse
paper 0.7060 ±0.0100

Difference within reported uncertainty; not counted as underperformance.

paper 0.7060 ±0.0100 Δ at pub 0.0038
#ModelAccuracy ↑Paper
1
GMN
0.7866
2
MemGNN
0.7550
3
TFGW SP
0.7510 ±0.0500
17
GatedGCN
0.7000 ±0.0494
26
GraphSAGE
0.6817 ±0.0545
124
MLP
0.5583 ±0.0352
170
FoSR
actual #170 vs paper #243 73 places worse
0.4555 ±0.0126
best reported
actual #170 vs paper #243 73 places worse
paper 0.2740 ±0.0110
paper 0.2740 ±0.0110 Δ at pub 0.1815
189
SDRF
actual #189 vs paper #215 26 places worse
0.3958 ±0.0133
best reported
actual #189 vs paper #215 26 places worse
paper 0.3350 ±0.0130
paper 0.3350 ±0.0130 Δ at pub 0.0608
191
None
actual #191 vs paper #224 33 places worse
0.3902 ±0.0117
best reported
actual #191 vs paper #224 33 places worse
paper 0.3130 ±0.0120
paper 0.3130 ±0.0120 Δ at pub 0.0772
206
BORF
0.3550 ±0.0120
This paper

Heterophilic Graphs

#ModelAccuracy ↑Paper
1
Hetero-S (GAT 8-layer)
0.8693
2
Dir-GNN+CNA
0.8586 ±0.0180
3
GAT
0.8560
52
GCN
0.7033
87
BORF
0.6530 ±0.0080
This paper
120
FoSR
actual #120 vs paper #139 19 places worse
0.6123 ±0.0053
best reported
actual #120 vs paper #139 19 places worse
paper 0.5930 ±0.0060
paper 0.5930 ±0.0060 Δ today 0.0193
122
SDRF
actual #122 vs paper #138 16 places worse
0.6119 ±0.0055
best reported
actual #122 vs paper #138 16 places worse
paper 0.5940 ±0.0050
paper 0.5940 ±0.0050 Δ today 0.0179
141
None
0.5920 ±0.0060
This paper
169
MLP
0.5429
SOTA performance (not significantly different from the best) Proposed method (this paper) Baseline / comparison (this paper) Global context (other papers) Best at pub — reported result worse than the best known when published (best reported in green) Best today — OK at publication; today's leaderboard best is elsewhere