How Curvature Enhance the Adaptation Power of Framelet GCNs

Dai Shi, Yi Guo, Zhiqi Shao, Junbin Gao

Main figure for How Curvature Enhance the Adaptation Power of Framelet GCNs

Abstract

Graph neural network (GNN) has been demonstrated powerful in modeling graph-structured data. However, despite many successful cases of applying GNNs to various graph classification and prediction tasks, whether the graph geometrical information has been fully exploited to enhance the learning performance of GNNs is not yet well understood. This paper introduces a new approach to enhance GNN by discrete graph Ricci curvature. Specifically, the graph Ricci curvature defined on the edges of a graph measures how difficult the information transits on one edge from one node to another based on their neighborhoods. Motivated by the geometric analogy of Ricci curvature in the graph setting, we prove that by inserting the curvature information with different carefully designed transformation function $ $, several known computational issues in GNN such as over-smoothing can be alleviated in our proposed model. Furthermore, we verified that edges with very positive Ricci curvature (i.e., $ _i,j 1$) are preferred to be dropped to enhance model's adaption to heterophily graph and one curvature based graph edge drop algorithm is proposed. Comprehensive experiments show that our curvature-based GNN model outperforms the state-of-the-art baselines in both homophily and heterophily graph datasets, indicating the effectiveness of involving graph geometric information in GNNs.

Proposed method: RC-UFG

Benchmark Results

Tested on 5 datasets 19 baseline values reported too low

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

Classic

#ModelAccuracy ↑Paper
1
GraphSAGE+CNA
0.9418 ±0.0033
2
GCN+CNA
0.9366 ±0.0048
3
TransformerConv
0.9350 ±0.0058
21
GCN
0.9004
44
GAT
actual #44 vs paper #424 380 places worse
0.8897 ±0.0014
best reported
actual #44 vs paper #424 380 places worse
paper 0.8300 ±0.0070
paper 0.8300 ±0.0070 Δ at pub 0.0590 Δ today 0.0597
55
JKNet
actual #55 vs paper #325 270 places worse
0.8870
best reported
actual #55 vs paper #325 270 places worse
paper 0.8370 ±0.0070
paper 0.8370 ±0.0070 Δ at pub 0.0500
77
GPRGNN
actual #77 vs paper #315 238 places worse
0.8826 ±0.0050
best reported
actual #77 vs paper #315 238 places worse
paper 0.8380 ±0.0090
265
RC-UFG
0.8440 ±0.0070
This paper
350
UFGConv_R
0.8360 ±0.0060
This paper
428
UFGConv_S
0.8300 ±0.0050
This paper
458
CurvGN
actual #458 vs paper #458
0.8260 ±0.0060
actual #458 vs paper #458
paper 0.8260 ±0.0060
prev best: Union Subgraph Neural Networks (AAAI 2023)
paper 0.8260 ±0.0060 Δ at pub 0.0854
508
MoNet
actual #508 vs paper #558 50 places worse
0.8220 ±0.0070
best reported
actual #508 vs paper #558 50 places worse
paper 0.8170
best at pub: GRAND: Graph Neural Diffusion (ICML 2021)

Difference within reported uncertainty; not counted as underperformance.

paper 0.8170 Δ at pub 0.0050
724
MLP
actual #724 vs paper #890 166 places worse
0.7768
best reported
actual #724 vs paper #890 166 places worse
paper 0.5510
#ModelAccuracy ↑Paper
1
CNA
0.9575 ±0.0058
2
IS-GIB
0.9390 ±0.0187
3
EERM
0.9112 ±0.0145
20
APPNP
actual #20 vs paper #140 120 places worse
0.8142 ±0.0026
best reported
actual #20 vs paper #140 120 places worse
paper 0.7590 ±0.0060
paper 0.7590 ±0.0060 Δ at pub 0.0552
32
GPRGNN
actual #32 vs paper #140 108 places worse
0.8102 ±0.0071
best reported
actual #32 vs paper #140 108 places worse
paper 0.7590 ±0.0070
paper 0.7590 ±0.0070 Δ at pub 0.0267 Δ today 0.0512
35
GAT
actual #35 vs paper #388 353 places worse
0.8080 ±0.0026
best reported
actual #35 vs paper #388 353 places worse
paper 0.7250 ±0.0070
paper 0.7250 ±0.0070 Δ at pub 0.0830
44
GCN
actual #44 vs paper #561 517 places worse
0.8033 ±0.0088
best reported
actual #44 vs paper #561 517 places worse
paper 0.7090 ±0.0050
paper 0.7090 ±0.0050 Δ at pub 0.0853 Δ today 0.0943
61
GraphSAGE
0.7923 ±0.0053
62
JKNet
actual #62 vs paper #388 326 places worse
0.7920
best reported
actual #62 vs paper #388 326 places worse
paper 0.7250 ±0.0040
paper 0.7250 ±0.0040 Δ at pub 0.0670
350
MLP
actual #350 vs paper #834 484 places worse
0.7289 ±0.0010
best reported
actual #350 vs paper #834 484 places worse
paper 0.5910
paper 0.5910 Δ at pub 0.1048 Δ today 0.1379
365
UFGConv_R
0.7270 ±0.0060
This paper
400
RC-UFG
0.7250 ±0.0070
This paper
506
CurvGN
actual #506 vs paper #506
0.7150 ±0.0080
actual #506 vs paper #506
paper 0.7150 ±0.0080
prev best: Union Subgraph Neural Networks (AAAI 2023)
paper 0.7150 ±0.0080 Δ at pub 0.0942
540
MoNet
0.7120
This paper
556
UFGConv_S
0.7100 ±0.0060
This paper
#ModelAccuracy ↑Paper
1
LGTL
0.9518 ±0.0011
2
MixHop (LO)
0.9513 ±0.0038
3
GraphSAGE (LO)
0.9511 ±0.0036
18
GCN
0.9296 ±0.0015
20
GAT
actual #20 vs paper #585 565 places worse
0.9233 ±0.0018
best reported
actual #20 vs paper #585 565 places worse
paper 0.7900 ±0.0030
24
JKNet
actual #24 vs paper #313 289 places worse
0.9160
best reported
actual #24 vs paper #313 289 places worse
paper 0.8260 ±0.0050
paper 0.8260 ±0.0050 Δ at pub 0.0900
101
GPRGNN
actual #101 vs paper #321 220 places worse
0.8911 ±0.0008
best reported
actual #101 vs paper #321 220 places worse
paper 0.8230 ±0.0020
paper 0.8230 ±0.0020 Δ at pub 0.0681
210
MLP
actual #210 vs paper #827 617 places worse
0.8690 ±0.0074
best reported
actual #210 vs paper #827 617 places worse
paper 0.7140
paper 0.7140 Δ at pub 0.1498 Δ today 0.1550
306
RC-UFG
0.8290 ±0.0020
This paper
446
MoNet
actual #446 vs paper #628 182 places worse
0.8006 ±0.0055
best reported
actual #446 vs paper #628 182 places worse
paper 0.7860
488
UFGConv_R
0.7960 ±0.0040
This paper
525
UFGConv_S
0.7940 ±0.0040
This paper
616
CurvGN
actual #616 vs paper #616
0.7880 ±0.0060
actual #616 vs paper #616
paper 0.7880 ±0.0060
prev best: Union Subgraph Neural Networks (AAAI 2023)
paper 0.7880 ±0.0060 Δ at pub 0.0426

Heterophilic Graphs

#ModelAccuracy ↑Paper
1
P^2GNN
0.9672 ±0.0147
2
DoG
0.9660 ±0.0210
3
GPF-plus
0.9583 ±0.0419
34
MLP
0.9230 ±0.0070
36
MLP-2
0.9226 ±0.0071
This paper
40
H2GCN
actual #40 vs paper #126 86 places worse
0.8590 ±0.0353
actual #40 vs paper #126 86 places worse
paper 0.8590 ±0.0353
prev best: Graph-Coupled Oscillator Networks (ICML 2022)

Improvement within reported uncertainty; not highlighted.

paper 0.8590 ±0.0353 Δ at pub 0.0100
53
GraphSAGE
actual #53 vs paper #261 208 places worse
0.9000 ±0.0365
best reported
actual #53 vs paper #261 208 places worse
paper 0.7903 ±0.0120
paper 0.7903 ±0.0120 Δ at pub 0.0517 Δ today 0.1097
189
SAGE
0.8269
196
UFG
actual #196 vs paper #200 4 places worse
0.8230 ±0.0090
best reported
actual #196 vs paper #200 4 places worse
paper 0.8225 ±0.0091

Difference within reported uncertainty; not counted as underperformance.

paper 0.8225 ±0.0091 Δ today 0.0005
211
GAT
actual #211 vs paper #265 54 places worse
0.8162 ±0.0645
best reported
actual #211 vs paper #265 54 places worse
paper 0.7887 ±0.0086

Difference within reported uncertainty; not counted as underperformance.

paper 0.7887 ±0.0086 Δ at pub 0.0093 Δ today 0.0275
228
RC-UFG (Het)_D
0.8105 ±0.0021
This paper
245
RC-UFG
0.7996 ±0.0138
This paper
298
Mixhp
0.7639 ±0.0766
This paper
#ModelAccuracy ↑Paper
1
IBG-NN
0.7763 ±0.0179
2
Dir-GNN+CNA
0.7747 ±0.0128
3
DHGNN
0.7684 ±0.0161
39
H2GCN
actual #39 vs paper #240 201 places worse
0.6190 ±0.0140
best reported
actual #39 vs paper #240 201 places worse
paper 0.3039 ±0.0122
paper 0.3039 ±0.0122 Δ at pub 0.1036 Δ today 0.3151
46
GCN
actual #46 vs paper #111 65 places worse
0.6067
best reported
actual #46 vs paper #111 65 places worse
paper 0.4566 ±0.0039
paper 0.4566 ±0.0039 Δ at pub 0.1004 Δ today 0.1501
67
GAT
actual #67 vs paper #135 68 places worse
0.5630 ±0.0220
best reported
actual #67 vs paper #135 68 places worse
paper 0.4272 ±0.0033
paper 0.4272 ±0.0033 Δ at pub 0.1358
68
APPNP
actual #68 vs paper #222 154 places worse
0.5590 ±0.0290
best reported
actual #68 vs paper #222 154 places worse
paper 0.3477 ±0.0034
paper 0.3477 ±0.0034 Δ at pub 0.2113
104
RC-UFG (Het)_D
0.4658 ±0.0044
This paper
120
SAGE
0.4460 ±0.0130
122
RC-UFG
0.4453 ±0.0153
This paper
124
UFG
0.4428 ±0.0091
This paper
128
GraphSAGE
actual #128 vs paper #151 23 places worse
0.4378 ±0.0190
best reported
actual #128 vs paper #151 23 places worse
paper 0.4126 ±0.0026

Difference within reported uncertainty; not counted as underperformance.

paper 0.4126 ±0.0026 Δ at pub 0.0035 Δ today 0.0252
172
MLP
0.3930 ±0.0079
237
MLP-2
0.3128 ±0.0027
This paper
266
Mixhp
0.2455 ±0.0260
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 at pub — reported value improved over the best known when published Best today — OK at publication; today's leaderboard best is elsewhere