SGL-PT: A Strong Graph Learner with Graph Prompt Tuning

Yun Zhu, Jianhao Guo, Siliang Tang

Main figure for SGL-PT: A Strong Graph Learner with Graph Prompt Tuning

Abstract

Recently, much exertion has been paid to design graph self-supervised methods to obtain generalized pre-trained models, and adapt pre-trained models onto downstream tasks through standard fine-tuning. But the gap between pretext and downstream tasks can limit pre-trained models' potential, leading to negative transfer. Meanwhile, prompt tuning has seen emerging success in natural language processing (NLP) by aligning pre-training and fine-tuning with consistent training objectives. In this paper, we identify the challenges for graph prompt tuning: The first is the lack of a strong and universal pre-training task across sundry pre-training methods in graph domain. Such a task should be easily emulated by downstream tasks, akin to the Masked Language Modeling (MLM) in the NLP domain. The second challenge lies in the difficulty of designing a consistent training objective for both pre-training and downstream tasks due to the inherent abstraction of graph data. To overcome above obstacles, we propose a novel framework named SGL-PT which follows the learning strategy ``Pre-train, Prompt, and Predict''. Specifically, we raise a strong and universal pre-training task coined as SGL that acquires the complementary merits of generative and contrastive self-supervised graph learning. And motivated by prompt design in NLP, we reformulate the downstream task as maksed node prediction by designing a novel verbalizer-free prompting function, resulting in unifying the objectives of pre-text and downstream tasks. Empirical results show that our pre-training method surpasses other baselines under unsupervised setting, and our prompt tuning method can significantly facilitate models on biological datasets over standard fine-tuning and other graph prompt methods.

Proposed method: SGL

Benchmark Results

Tested on 3 datasets 17 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
actual #39 vs paper #237 198 places worse
0.9330 ±0.0290
best reported
actual #39 vs paper #237 198 places worse
paper 0.8940 ±0.0560

Difference within reported uncertainty; not counted as underperformance.

paper 0.8940 ±0.0560 Δ at pub 0.0390
63
GCN
actual #63 vs paper #432 369 places worse
0.9220 ±0.0440
best reported
actual #63 vs paper #432 369 places worse
paper 0.8560 ±0.0580

Difference within reported uncertainty; not counted as underperformance.

paper 0.8560 ±0.0580 Δ at pub 0.0350 Δ today 0.0660
105
InfoGCL
0.9120 ±0.0130
This paper
159
WL
actual #159 vs paper #596 437 places worse
0.9040 ±0.0570
best reported
actual #159 vs paper #596 437 places worse
paper 0.8072 ±0.0300
paper 0.8072 ±0.0300 Δ at pub 0.0968
158
GraphSAGE
0.9040 ±0.0780
199
MVGRL
actual #199 vs paper #213 14 places worse
0.8993 ±0.0616
best reported
actual #199 vs paper #213 14 places worse
paper 0.8970 ±0.0110

Difference within reported uncertainty; not counted as underperformance.

paper 0.8970 ±0.0110 Δ today 0.0023
239
DiffPool
actual #239 vs paper #447 208 places worse
0.8940 ±0.0460
best reported
actual #239 vs paper #447 208 places worse
paper 0.8500 ±0.1030
best at pub: Total Variation Graph Neural Networks (ICML 2022)

Difference within reported uncertainty; not counted as underperformance.

paper 0.8500 ±0.1030 Δ at pub 0.0140 Δ today 0.0440
257
InfoGraph
actual #257 vs paper #272 15 places worse
0.8930 ±0.0514
best reported
actual #257 vs paper #272 15 places worse
paper 0.8901 ±0.0113
best at pub: Graph Contrastive Learning Automated (ICML 2021)

Difference within reported uncertainty; not counted as underperformance.

paper 0.8901 ±0.0113 Δ today 0.0029
258
GraphMAE
actual #258 vs paper #326 68 places worse
0.8930 ±0.0110
best reported
actual #258 vs paper #326 68 places worse
paper 0.8819 ±0.0126

Difference within reported uncertainty; not counted as underperformance.

paper 0.8819 ±0.0126 Δ today 0.0111
272
SimGRACE
actual #272 vs paper #272
0.8910 ±0.0140
best reported
actual #272 vs paper #272
paper 0.8901 ±0.0131

Difference within reported uncertainty; not counted as underperformance.

paper 0.8901 ±0.0131 Δ today 0.0009
293
SGL
0.8883 ±0.0144
This paper
351
JOAO
actual #351 vs paper #370 19 places worse
0.8770 ±0.0080
best reported
actual #351 vs paper #370 19 places worse
paper 0.8735 ±0.0102

Difference within reported uncertainty; not counted as underperformance.

paper 0.8735 ±0.0102 Δ at pub 0.0035 Δ today 0.0035
354
GraphCL
actual #354 vs paper #396 42 places worse
0.8766 ±0.0103
best reported
actual #354 vs paper #396 42 places worse
paper 0.8680 ±0.0134

Difference within reported uncertainty; not counted as underperformance.

paper 0.8680 ±0.0134 Δ at pub 0.0086
365
DGK
0.8744 ±0.0272
This paper
403
MLP
0.8660 ±0.0495
407
graph2vec
actual #407 vs paper #517 110 places worse
0.8644 ±0.0125
best reported
actual #407 vs paper #517 110 places worse
paper 0.8315 ±0.0925

Difference within reported uncertainty; not counted as underperformance.

paper 0.8315 ±0.0925 Δ at pub 0.0329
444
GL
actual #444 vs paper #577 133 places worse
0.8520 ±0.0090
best reported
actual #444 vs paper #577 133 places worse
paper 0.8166 ±0.0211
paper 0.8166 ±0.0211 Δ at pub 0.0354
471
EdgePred
0.8449 ±0.0156
This paper
472
Sub2Vec
actual #472 vs paper #786 314 places worse
0.8447 ±0.0037
best reported
actual #472 vs paper #786 314 places worse
paper 0.6105 ±0.1579

Difference within reported uncertainty; not counted as underperformance.

paper 0.6105 ±0.1579 Δ at pub 0.2342
#ModelAccuracy ↑Paper
1
WL-MLP
0.9954
2
GIN
actual #2 vs paper #91 89 places worse
0.9934
best reported
actual #2 vs paper #91 89 places worse
paper 0.8270 ±0.0170
paper 0.8270 ±0.0170 Δ at pub 0.1664
3
GCN
actual #3 vs paper #214 211 places worse
0.9727
best reported
actual #3 vs paper #214 211 places worse
paper 0.8020 ±0.0200
paper 0.8020 ±0.0200 Δ at pub 0.1707
12
WL
actual #12 vs paper #223 211 places worse
0.8590 ±0.0010
best reported
actual #12 vs paper #223 211 places worse
paper 0.8001 ±0.0050
best at pub: Propagation Kernels (2014)
paper 0.8001 ±0.0050 Δ at pub 0.0589
104
GraphCL
actual #104 vs paper #325 221 places worse
0.8250 ±0.0013
best reported
actual #104 vs paper #325 221 places worse
paper 0.7787 ±0.0041
paper 0.7787 ±0.0041 Δ at pub 0.0463
131
GraphSAGE
0.8200 ±0.0100
141
SimGRACE
actual #141 vs paper #258 117 places worse
0.8180 ±0.0015
best reported
actual #141 vs paper #258 117 places worse
paper 0.7912 ±0.0044
paper 0.7912 ±0.0044 Δ at pub 0.0268
182
SGL
0.8091 ±0.0042
This paper
200
GraphMAE
actual #200 vs paper #202 2 places worse
0.8042 ±0.0035
best reported
actual #200 vs paper #202 2 places worse
paper 0.8040 ±0.0030

Difference within reported uncertainty; not counted as underperformance.

paper 0.8040 ±0.0030 Δ today 0.0002
210
DGK
0.8031 ±0.0046
This paper
215
InfoGCL
0.8020 ±0.0060
This paper
301
JOAO
actual #301 vs paper #317 16 places worse
0.7840 ±0.0050
best reported
actual #301 vs paper #317 16 places worse
paper 0.7807 ±0.0047

Difference within reported uncertainty; not counted as underperformance.

paper 0.7807 ±0.0047 Δ at pub 0.0033
326
EdgePred
actual #326 vs paper #424 98 places worse
0.7782 ±0.0295
best reported
actual #326 vs paper #424 98 places worse
paper 0.7441 ±0.0150
paper 0.7441 ±0.0150 Δ today 0.0341
338
InfoGraph
actual #338 vs paper #386 48 places worse
0.7750 ±0.0074
best reported
actual #338 vs paper #386 48 places worse
paper 0.7620 ±0.0106

Difference within reported uncertainty; not counted as underperformance.

paper 0.7620 ±0.0106 Δ at pub 0.0130
406
graph2vec
actual #406 vs paper #446 40 places worse
0.7540 ±0.0120
best reported
actual #406 vs paper #446 40 places worse
paper 0.7322 ±0.0181

Difference within reported uncertainty; not counted as underperformance.

paper 0.7322 ±0.0181 Δ at pub 0.0218
557
Sub2Vec
actual #557 vs paper #575 18 places worse
0.5976 ±0.0035
best reported
actual #557 vs paper #575 18 places worse
paper 0.5289 ±0.0161
paper 0.5289 ±0.0161 Δ at pub 0.0687
#ModelAccuracy ↑Paper
1
WL-MLP
0.9792
2
MSH-GNN
0.9640 ±0.0070
3
CoCN
0.8722 ±0.0013
6
graph2vec
actual #6 vs paper #290 284 places worse
0.8558
best reported
actual #6 vs paper #290 284 places worse
paper 0.7110 ±0.0054
paper 0.7110 ±0.0054 Δ at pub 0.1448
22
GraphMAE
actual #22 vs paper #109 87 places worse
0.8270 ±0.0100
best reported
actual #22 vs paper #109 87 places worse
paper 0.8032 ±0.0046
paper 0.8032 ±0.0046 Δ today 0.0238
23
GCN
actual #23 vs paper #156 133 places worse
0.8260 ±0.0220
best reported
actual #23 vs paper #156 133 places worse
paper 0.7900 ±0.0180
paper 0.7900 ±0.0180 Δ at pub 0.0160 Δ today 0.0360
30
GIN
actual #30 vs paper #111 81 places worse
0.8220 ±0.0210
best reported
actual #30 vs paper #111 81 places worse
paper 0.8020 ±0.0190

Difference within reported uncertainty; not counted as underperformance.

paper 0.8020 ±0.0190 Δ today 0.0200
33
DiffPool
actual #33 vs paper #161 128 places worse
0.8213 ±0.0043
best reported
actual #33 vs paper #161 128 places worse
paper 0.7890 ±0.0230

Difference within reported uncertainty; not counted as underperformance.

paper 0.7890 ±0.0230 Δ at pub 0.0037 Δ today 0.0323
37
SimGRACE
actual #37 vs paper #286 249 places worse
0.8188 ±0.0023
best reported
actual #37 vs paper #286 249 places worse
paper 0.7172 ±0.0082
paper 0.7172 ±0.0082 Δ at pub 0.1016
80
GraphCL
actual #80 vs paper #290 210 places worse
0.8108 ±0.0017
best reported
actual #80 vs paper #290 210 places worse
paper 0.7136 ±0.0115
paper 0.7136 ±0.0115 Δ at pub 0.0972
90
SGL
0.8080 ±0.0023
This paper
136
GraphSAGE
0.7970 ±0.0170
146
InfoGraph
actual #146 vs paper #295 149 places worse
0.7940
best reported
actual #146 vs paper #295 149 places worse
paper 0.7065 ±0.0113
paper 0.7065 ±0.0113 Δ at pub 0.0875
151
MLP
0.7920 ±0.0240
153
WL
actual #153 vs paper #306 153 places worse
0.7910 ±0.0010
best reported
actual #153 vs paper #306 153 places worse
paper 0.6930 ±0.0344
paper 0.6930 ±0.0344 Δ at pub 0.0980
248
JOAO
actual #248 vs paper #305 57 places worse
0.7535 ±0.0093
best reported
actual #248 vs paper #305 57 places worse
paper 0.6950 ±0.0036
paper 0.6950 ±0.0036 Δ at pub 0.0585
256
EdgePred
actual #256 vs paper #320 64 places worse
0.7464 ±0.0224
best reported
actual #256 vs paper #320 64 places worse
paper 0.6480 ±0.0116
paper 0.6480 ±0.0116 Δ today 0.0984
274
DGK
actual #274 vs paper #321 47 places worse
0.7310 ±0.0030
best reported
actual #274 vs paper #321 47 places worse
paper 0.6466 ±0.0050
paper 0.6466 ±0.0050 Δ at pub 0.0844 Δ today 0.0844
321
GL
actual #321 vs paper #338 17 places worse
0.6470 ±0.0010
best reported
actual #321 vs paper #338 17 places worse
paper 0.5630 ±0.0060
paper 0.5630 ±0.0060 Δ at pub 0.0840
325
Sub2Vec
actual #325 vs paper #341 16 places worse
0.6210 ±0.0140
best reported
actual #325 vs paper #341 16 places worse
paper 0.5526 ±0.0154
paper 0.5526 ±0.0154 Δ at pub 0.0684
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