ICML 2023

Towards Better Graph Representation Learning with Parameterized Decomposition & Filtering

Mingqi Yang, Wenjie Feng, Yanming Shen, Bryan Hooi

Main figure for Towards Better Graph Representation Learning with Parameterized Decomposition & Filtering

Abstract

Proposing an effective and flexible matrix to represent a graph is a fundamental challenge that has been explored from multiple perspectives, e.g., filtering in Graph Fourier Transforms. In this work, we develop a novel and general framework which unifies many existing GNN models from the view of parameterized decomposition and filtering, and show how it helps to enhance the flexibility of GNNs while alleviating the smoothness and amplification issues of existing models. Essentially, we show that the extensively studied spectral graph convolutions with learnable polynomial filters are constrained variants of this formulation, and releasing these constraints enables our model to express the desired decomposition and filtering simultaneously. Based on this generalized framework, we develop models that are simple in implementation but achieve significant improvements and computational efficiency on a variety of graph learning tasks. Code is available at https://github.com/qslim/PDF.

Benchmark Results

Tested on 7 datasets 1 baseline value 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
143
PPGNN
0.9055 ±0.0870
This paper
200
GSO
0.8991 ±0.0435
This paper
301
CapsGNN
actual #301 vs paper #301
0.8867 ±0.0688
actual #301 vs paper #301
paper 0.8867 ±0.0688

Improvement within reported uncertainty; not highlighted.

paper 0.8867 ±0.0688 Δ at pub 0.0197
403
MLP
0.8660 ±0.0495
418
k-GNN
0.8610
This paper
492
IGN
actual #492 vs paper #497 5 places worse
0.8390 ±0.1300
best reported
actual #492 vs paper #497 5 places worse
paper 0.8389 ±0.1295

Difference within reported uncertainty; not counted as underperformance.

paper 0.8389 ±0.1295 Δ at pub 0.0001 Δ today 0.0001
501
RW
actual #501 vs paper #644 143 places worse
0.8370 ±0.0150
best reported
actual #501 vs paper #644 143 places worse
paper 0.7911 ±0.0210
506
GK
actual #506 vs paper #580 74 places worse
0.8350 ±0.0060
best reported
actual #506 vs paper #580 74 places worse
paper 0.8152 ±0.0211

Difference within reported uncertainty; not counted as underperformance.

paper 0.8152 ±0.0211 Δ at pub 0.0198
#ModelAccuracy ↑Paper
1
WL-MLP
0.9954
2
GIN
0.9934
3
GCN
0.9727
17
GSO
0.8547 ±0.0138
This paper
68
PPGNN
0.8319 ±0.0111
This paper
131
GraphSAGE
0.8200 ±0.0100
428
IGN
actual #428 vs paper #428
0.7433 ±0.0271
actual #428 vs paper #428
paper 0.7433 ±0.0271

Improvement within reported uncertainty; not highlighted.

paper 0.7433 ±0.0271 Δ at pub 0.0003
#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
71
PPGNN
0.7720 ±0.0473
This paper
100
IGN
actual #100 vs paper #105 5 places worse
0.7660 ±0.0550
best reported
actual #100 vs paper #105 5 places worse
paper 0.7658 ±0.0549

Difference within reported uncertainty; not counted as underperformance.

paper 0.7658 ±0.0549 Δ today 0.0002
126
CapsGNN
actual #126 vs paper #135 9 places worse
0.7630 ±0.0360
best reported
actual #126 vs paper #135 9 places worse
paper 0.7620 ±0.0360

Difference within reported uncertainty; not counted as underperformance.

paper 0.7620 ±0.0360 Δ at pub 0.0010
131
PDF
0.7628 ±0.0510
This paper
149
MLP
0.7600 ±0.0320
191
k-GNN
0.7550
This paper
#ModelAccuracy ↑Paper
1
GMN
0.7866
2
MemGNN
0.7550
3
TFGW SP
0.7510 ±0.0500
5
PDF
0.7350 ±0.0639
This paper
17
GatedGCN
0.7000 ±0.0494
26
GraphSAGE
0.6817 ±0.0545
124
MLP
0.5583 ±0.0352
304
PSCN
0.0000
This paper
#ModelAccuracy ↑Paper
1
OEPG
0.9630 ±0.0090
2
MSH-GNN
0.9580 ±0.0090
3
GNN-AK+
0.9480 ±0.0080
6
GSO
0.9340 ±0.0130
This paper
13
GIN
0.9240 ±0.0250
53
AWE
0.8789 ±0.0253
This paper
59
PSCN
0.8630 ±0.0158
This paper
76
GK
0.7734 ±0.0018
This paper
91
DCNN
0.4906 ±0.0140
This paper

OGB

#ModelAP ↑Paper
1
GRPE-Large
0.3150 ±0.0010
2
Graphormer
0.3140
3
Graphormer-FLAG
0.3139 ±0.0032
7
GSO
0.3031 ±0.0026
This paper
11
GINE-AP
0.2979 ±0.0030
This paper
18
PHC-GN
0.2947 ±0.0026
This paper
31
GIN
0.2902 ±0.0017
35
DeeperG
0.2842 ±0.0043
This paper
84
ExpC
0.2342 ±0.0029
This paper
#ModelAccuracy ↑Paper
1
A-NLSF
0.8149 ±0.0067
2
differential encoding
0.8096 ±0.0029
3
MPNN + VN + NoPE
0.8055 ±0.0038
6
PDF
0.8010 ±0.0052
This paper
14
DeeperG
0.7712 ±0.0071
This paper
16
GatedGCN
0.7531 ±0.0083
18
KS-SAT
0.7522 ±0.0056
This paper
33
GIN
0.7037 ±0.0107
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)