NeurIPS 2022

On the Ability of Graph Neural Networks to Model Interactions Between Vertices

Noam Razin, Tom Verbin, Nadav Cohen

Main figure for On the Ability of Graph Neural Networks to Model Interactions Between Vertices

Abstract

Graph neural networks (GNNs) are widely used for modeling complex interactions between entities represented as vertices of a graph. Despite recent efforts to theoretically analyze the expressive power of GNNs, a formal characterization of their ability to model interactions is lacking. The current paper aims to address this gap. Formalizing strength of interactions through an established measure known as separation rank, we quantify the ability of certain GNNs to model interaction between a given subset of vertices and its complement, i.e. between the sides of a given partition of input vertices. Our results reveal that the ability to model interaction is primarily determined by the partition's walk index -- a graph-theoretical characteristic defined by the number of walks originating from the boundary of the partition. Experiments with common GNN architectures corroborate this finding. As a practical application of our theory, we design an edge sparsification algorithm named Walk Index Sparsification (WIS), which preserves the ability of a GNN to model interactions when input edges are removed. WIS is simple, computationally efficient, and in our experiments has markedly outperformed alternative methods in terms of induced prediction accuracy. More broadly, it showcases the potential of improving GNNs by theoretically analyzing the interactions they can model.

Proposed method: GCN

Benchmark Results

Tested on 1 dataset 1 baseline value reported too low

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

Classic

#ModelAccuracy ↑Paper
1
GraphTARIF
0.9461 ±0.0017
2
GCN
actual #2 vs paper #479 477 places worse
0.9412 ±0.0008
best reported
actual #2 vs paper #479 477 places worse
paper 0.6620 ±0.0110
paper 0.6620 ±0.0110 Δ at pub 0.2165 Δ today 0.2792
3
GAT
actual #3 vs paper #465 462 places worse
0.9398 ±0.0022
best reported
actual #3 vs paper #465 462 places worse
paper 0.7210 ±0.0120
8
SAGE
0.9351 ±0.0006
282
GIN
actual #282 vs paper #480 198 places worse
0.8626 ±0.0056
best reported
actual #282 vs paper #480 198 places worse
paper 0.6480 ±0.0140
best today: Union Subgraph Neural Networks (AAAI 2023)
paper 0.6480 ±0.0140 Δ today 0.2146
320
MLP
0.8463
SOTA performance (not significantly different from the best) 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