ICLR 2023

Deep Temporal Graph Clustering

Meng Liu, Yue Liu, K. Liang, Siwei Wang, Sihang Zhou, Xinwang Liu

Main figure for Deep Temporal Graph Clustering

Abstract

Deep graph clustering has recently received significant attention due to its ability to enhance the representation learning capabilities of models in unsupervised scenarios. Nevertheless, deep clustering for temporal graphs, which could capture crucial dynamic interaction information, has not been fully explored. It means that in many clustering-oriented real-world scenarios, temporal graphs can only be processed as static graphs. This not only causes the loss of dynamic information but also triggers huge computational consumption. To solve the problem, we propose a general framework for deep Temporal Graph Clustering called TGC, which introduces deep clustering techniques to suit the interaction sequence-based batch-processing pattern of temporal graphs. In addition, we discuss differences between temporal graph clustering and static graph clustering from several levels. To verify the superiority of the proposed framework TGC, we conduct extensive experiments. The experimental results show that temporal graph clustering enables more flexibility in finding a balance between time and space requirements, and our framework can effectively improve the performance of existing temporal graph learning methods. The code is released:.

Proposed method: TGC

Benchmark Results

Tested on 1 dataset 3 baseline values reported too low Non-standard metric on 1 dataset

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

Heterogeneous Graph Benchmarks

DBLP

Global leaderboard →
Non-default metric. This paper reports F1; the dataset default is Micro-F1. Values below use F1 only.

Sorted by F1. Highlighted rows are from other papers.

#ModelF1 ↑Paper
1
AUG_bal
0.9454 ±0.0123
2
AUG_min
0.9375 ±0.0115
3
AUG_ran
0.9368 ±0.0108
35
GAE
actual #35 vs paper #60 25 places worse
0.7680
best reported
actual #35 vs paper #60 25 places worse
paper 0.3504
paper 0.3504 Δ at pub 0.4176
36
DFCN
actual #36 vs paper #59 23 places worse
0.7570 ±0.0080
best reported
actual #36 vs paper #59 23 places worse
paper 0.3597
37
AE
actual #37 vs paper #59 22 places worse
0.7460
best reported
actual #37 vs paper #59 22 places worse
paper 0.3784
paper 0.3784 Δ at pub 0.3676
39
SAGE
0.7320
42
SDCN
actual #42 vs paper #58 16 places worse
0.6771 ±0.0151
best reported
actual #42 vs paper #58 16 places worse
paper 0.4031
paper 0.4031 Δ at pub 0.2349 Δ today 0.2740
50
MVGRL
actual #50 vs paper #63 13 places worse
0.5500 ±0.0700
best reported
actual #50 vs paper #63 13 places worse
paper 0.2479
paper 0.2479 Δ today 0.3021
53
TGC
0.4503
This paper
55
TREND
0.4454
This paper
56
HTNE
0.4398
This paper
57
Node2Vec
0.4335
This paper
59
DeepWalk
0.3856
This paper
60
SDCNQ
0.3518
This paper
61
TGAT
0.3422
This paper
64
JODIE
0.1323
This paper
65
TGN
0.1066
This paper
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