WWW 2023

Search to Capture Long-range Dependency with Stacking GNNs for Graph Classification

Lanning Wei, Zhiqiang He, Huan Zhao, Quanming Yao

Main figure for Search to Capture Long-range Dependency with Stacking GNNs for Graph Classification

Abstract

In recent years, Graph Neural Networks (GNNs) have been popular in the graph classification task. Currently, shallow GNNs are more common due to the well-known over-smoothing problem facing deeper GNNs. However, they are sub-optimal without utilizing the information from distant nodes, i.e., the long-range dependencies. The mainstream methods in the graph classification task can extract the long-range dependencies either by designing the pooling operations or incorporating the higher-order neighbors, while they have evident drawbacks by modifying the original graph structure, which may result in information loss in graph structure learning. In this paper, by justifying the smaller influence of the over-smoothing problem in the graph classification task, we evoke the importance of stacking-based GNNs and then employ them to capture the long-range dependencies without modifying the original graph structure. To achieve this, two design needs are given for stacking-based GNNs, i.e., sufficient model depth and adaptive skip-connection schemes. By transforming the two design needs into designing data-specific inter-layer connections, we propose a novel approach with the help of neural architecture search (NAS), which is dubbed LRGNN (Long-Range Graph Neural Networks). Extensive experiments on five datasets show that the proposed LRGNN can achieve the best performance, and obtained data-specific GNNs with different depth and skip-connection schemes, which can better capture the long-range dependencies. 1

Benchmark Results

Tested on 3 datasets 4 baseline values reported too low

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

TU Dortmund

#ModelAccuracy ↑Paper
1
WL-MLP
0.9954
2
GIN
0.9934
3
GCN
actual #3 vs paper #265 262 places worse
0.9727
best reported
actual #3 vs paper #265 262 places worse
paper 0.7898 ±0.0324
paper 0.7898 ±0.0324 Δ at pub 0.1829
5
DiffPool
actual #5 vs paper #410 405 places worse
0.9210 ±0.0260
best reported
actual #5 vs paper #410 405 places worse
paper 0.7504 ±0.0198
paper 0.7504 ±0.0198 Δ at pub 0.0269 Δ today 0.1706
100
GraphTrans
actual #100 vs paper #128 28 places worse
0.8260 ±0.0120
best reported
actual #100 vs paper #128 28 places worse
paper 0.8204 ±0.0143

Difference within reported uncertainty; not counted as underperformance.

paper 0.8204 ±0.0143 Δ today 0.0056
103
Full B12C1
0.8251 ±0.0137
This paper
131
GraphSAGE
0.8200 ±0.0100
140
Full B8C1
0.8182 ±0.0174
This paper
158
ResGCN
actual #158 vs paper #325 167 places worse
0.8140 ±0.0030
best reported
actual #158 vs paper #325 167 places worse
paper 0.7788 ±0.0224
paper 0.7788 ±0.0224 Δ at pub 0.0352
163
Repeat B12C3
0.8131 ±0.0168
This paper
180
Diverse B12C3
0.8097 ±0.0273
This paper
256
GCNJK
0.7924 ±0.0211
This paper
259
SAGPool
actual #259 vs paper #459 200 places worse
0.7910 ±0.0300
best reported
actual #259 vs paper #459 200 places worse
paper 0.7223 ±0.0368
paper 0.7223 ±0.0368 Δ at pub 0.0565 Δ today 0.0687
378
TwoHop(L4)
0.7642 ±0.0383
This paper
381
GCNFA(L8)
0.7639 ±0.0372
This paper
391
DGCNN(L8)
0.7608 ±0.0103
This paper
480
GCNVIR(L8)
0.7032 ±0.0432
This paper
#ModelAccuracy ↑Paper
1
MSH-GNN
0.9410 ±0.0330
2
GRDL
0.8260 ±0.0120
3
GMN
0.8225
7
DiffPool
actual #7 vs paper #232 225 places worse
0.8161 ±0.0232
best reported
actual #7 vs paper #232 225 places worse
paper 0.7511 ±0.0214
best at pub: Memory-Based Graph Networks (ICLR 2020)
paper 0.7511 ±0.0214 Δ at pub 0.0114 Δ today 0.0650
32
GIN
0.7880 ±0.0410
148
GCN
actual #148 vs paper #232 84 places worse
0.7600 ±0.0320
best reported
actual #148 vs paper #232 84 places worse
paper 0.7511 ±0.0451

Difference within reported uncertainty; not counted as underperformance.

paper 0.7511 ±0.0451 Δ at pub 0.0089 Δ today 0.0089
149
MLP
0.7600 ±0.0320
154
SAGPool
actual #154 vs paper #414 260 places worse
0.7595 ±0.0452
best reported
actual #154 vs paper #414 260 places worse
paper 0.7189 ±0.0403

Difference within reported uncertainty; not counted as underperformance.

paper 0.7189 ±0.0403 Δ at pub 0.0406
207
Full B8C1
0.7539 ±0.0440
This paper
217
TwoHop(L4)
0.7530 ±0.0427
This paper
218
Repeat B12C3
0.7530 ±0.0477
This paper
219
Full B4C1
0.7530 ±0.0467
This paper
220
Full B12C1
0.7529 ±0.0451
This paper
224
GCNJK
0.7524 ±0.0415
This paper
231
GraphTrans
actual #231 vs paper #232 1 place worse
0.7518 ±0.0336
best reported
actual #231 vs paper #232 1 place worse
paper 0.7512 ±0.0489

Difference within reported uncertainty; not counted as underperformance.

paper 0.7512 ±0.0489 Δ today 0.0006
233
ResGCN
actual #233 vs paper #233
0.7511 ±0.0322
actual #233 vs paper #233
paper 0.7511 ±0.0322

Improvement within reported uncertainty; not highlighted.

paper 0.7511 ±0.0322 Δ at pub 0.0041
257
Diverse B12C3
0.7493 ±0.0515
This paper
298
GCNFA(L8)
0.7431 ±0.0416
This paper
318
DGCNN(L8)
0.7395 ±0.0304
This paper
440
GCNVIR(L8)
0.7108 ±0.0314
This paper
#ModelAccuracy ↑Paper
1
ID-GNN+BEC
0.8150 ±0.0240
2
GIN+BEC
0.8080 ±0.0330
3
GCN+BEC
0.7990 ±0.0340
4
GCN
actual #4 vs paper #58 54 places worse
0.7980 ±0.0230
best reported
actual #4 vs paper #58 54 places worse
paper 0.7380 ±0.0513
paper 0.7380 ±0.0513 Δ at pub 0.0020 Δ today 0.0600
14
GIN
0.7810 ±0.0350
22
Full B8C1
0.7620 ±0.0518
This paper
41
SAGPool
actual #41 vs paper #71 30 places worse
0.7487 ±0.0409
best reported
actual #41 vs paper #71 30 places worse
paper 0.7340 ±0.0302

Difference within reported uncertainty; not counted as underperformance.

paper 0.7340 ±0.0302 Δ at pub 0.0147
46
Full B12C1
0.7450 ±0.0331
This paper
52
GCNJK
0.7420 ±0.0376
This paper
53
Repeat B12C3
0.7420 ±0.0541
This paper
54
Diverse B12C3
0.7420 ±0.0335
This paper
58
GraphTrans
0.7400 ±0.0574
This paper
62
ResGCN
0.7370 ±0.0570
This paper
68
GCNFA(L8)
0.7360 ±0.0562
This paper
78
DiffPool
actual #78 vs paper #99 21 places worse
0.7314 ±0.0070
best reported
actual #78 vs paper #99 21 places worse
paper 0.7227 ±0.0447

Difference within reported uncertainty; not counted as underperformance.

paper 0.7227 ±0.0447 Δ at pub 0.0087 Δ today 0.0087
98
TwoHop(L4)
0.7240 ±0.0561
This paper
113
DGCNN(L8)
0.7170 ±0.0365
This paper
121
GCNVIR(L8)
0.7150 ±0.0490
This paper
SOTA performance (not significantly different from the best) 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