Rethinking the Power of Graph Canonization in Graph Representation Learning with Stability
Abstract
The expressivity of Graph Neural Networks (GNNs) has been studied broadly in recent years to reveal the design principles for more powerful GNNs. Graph canonization is known as a typical approach to distinguish non-isomorphic graphs, yet rarely adopted when developing expressive GNNs. This paper proposes to maximize the expressivity of GNNs by graph canonization, then the power of such GNNs is studies from the perspective of model stability. A stable GNN will map similar graphs to close graph representations in the vectorial space, and the stability of GNNs is critical to generalize their performance to unseen graphs. We theoretically reveal the trade-off of expressivity and stability in graph-canonization-enhanced GNNs. Then we introduce a notion of universal graph canonization as the general solution to address the trade-off and characterize a widely applicable sufficient condition to solve the universal graph canonization. A comprehensive set of experiments demonstrates the effectiveness of the proposed method. In many popular graph benchmark datasets, graph canonization successfully enhances GNNs and provides highly competitive performance, indicating the capability and great potential of proposed method in general graph representation learning. In graph datasets where the sufficient condition holds, GNNs enhanced by universal graph canonization consistently outperform GNN baselines and successfully improve the SOTA performance up to $31\
Benchmark Results
Tested on 6 datasets 1 baseline value reported too low
Tables show presented results in global context (best 3 papers + GCN + MLP).
TU Dortmund
| # | Model | Accuracy ↑ | Paper |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | MSH-GNN | 0.9910
±0.0030 | |
| 2 | ID-GNN+BEC | 0.9830
±0.0360 | |
| 3 | SupCosine | 0.9830
±0.0250 | |
| 22 | GIN-AK+ | 0.9500
±0.0610 best reported | best at pub: Understanding and Extending Subgraph GNNs by Rethinking Their Symmetries (NeurIPS 2022) best today: Permutation-Invariant graph partitioning: How graph neural networks capture structural interactions? (2023) Difference within reported uncertainty; not counted as underperformance. |
| 24 | GraphSNN | 0.9470
±0.0190 best reported | best at pub: The Expressive Power of Graph Neural Networks: A Survey (2023) best today: Permutation-Invariant graph partitioning: How graph neural networks capture structural interactions? (2023) Difference within reported uncertainty; not counted as underperformance. |
| 39 | GIN | 0.9330
±0.0290 | |
| 73 | ESAN | 0.9200
±0.0500 best reported | best at pub: Asynchronous Neural Networks for Learning in Graphs (2022) Difference within reported uncertainty; not counted as underperformance. |
| 171 | GNN-RNI | 0.9040
±0.0740 | This paper |
| 166 | DropGNN | 0.9040
±0.0700 | This paper |
| 255 | GC-GNN (GCN) | 0.8940
±0.0880 | This paper |
| 322 | SignNet | 0.8830
±0.0920 | This paper |
| 339 | Nested GIN | 0.8790
±0.0820 | This paper |
| 403 | MLP | 0.8660
±0.0495 | |
| 468 | GIN (backbone) | 0.8450
±0.0890 | This paper |
| 496 | Nested GraphSAGE | 0.8390
±0.1070 | This paper |
| 530 | Nested GCN | 0.8290
±0.1110 | This paper |
| 572 | Nested GAT | 0.8190
±0.1020 | This paper |
| 726 | GraphSAGE (backbone) | 0.7400
±0.0880 | This paper |
| 732 | GAT (backbone) | 0.7390
±0.1070 | This paper |
| 739 | GCN (backbone) | 0.7340
±0.1080 | This paper |
| # | Model | Accuracy ↑ | Paper |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | MSH-GNN | 0.9410
±0.0330 | |
| 2 | GRDL | 0.8260
±0.0120 | |
| 3 | GMN | 0.8225 | |
| 30 | GIN-AK+ | 0.7890
±0.0540 best reported | best today: Permutation-Invariant graph partitioning: How graph neural networks capture structural interactions? (2023) Difference within reported uncertainty; not counted as underperformance. |
| 32 | GIN | 0.7880
±0.0410 | |
| 39 | GraphSNN | 0.7842
±0.0270 best reported | best at pub: The Expressive Power of Graph Neural Networks: A Survey (2023) best today: Permutation-Invariant graph partitioning: How graph neural networks capture structural interactions? (2023) Difference within reported uncertainty; not counted as underperformance. |
| 78 | ESAN | 0.7710
±0.0460 best reported | best at pub: The Expressive Power of Graph Neural Networks: A Survey (2023) best today: Permutation-Invariant graph partitioning: How graph neural networks capture structural interactions? (2023) Difference within reported uncertainty; not counted as underperformance. |
| 96 | GC-GNN (GCN) | 0.7670
±0.0510 | This paper |
| 130 | DropGNN | 0.7630
±0.0610 | This paper |
| 149 | MLP | 0.7600
±0.0320 | |
| 186 | SignNet | 0.7560
±0.0410 | This paper |
| 308 | Nested GraphSAGE | 0.7420
±0.0370 | This paper |
| 322 | Nested GIN | 0.7390
±0.0510 | This paper |
| 333 | Nested GAT | 0.7370
±0.0480 | This paper |
| 345 | GNN-RNI | 0.7350
±0.0450 | This paper |
| 354 | Nested GCN | 0.7330
±0.0400 | This paper |
| 410 | GAT (backbone) | 0.7200
±0.0330 | This paper |
| 422 | GCN (backbone) | 0.7170
±0.0470 | This paper |
| 437 | GraphSAGE (backbone) | 0.7120
±0.0520 | This paper |
| 448 | GIN (backbone) | 0.7060
±0.0430 | This paper |
| # | Model | Accuracy ↑ | Paper |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | GMN | 0.7866 | |
| 2 | MemGNN | 0.7550 | |
| 3 | TFGW SP | 0.7510
±0.0500 | |
| 17 | GatedGCN | 0.7000
±0.0494 | |
| 26 | GraphSAGE | 0.6817
±0.0545 | |
| 31 | GraphSNN | 0.6767
±0.0374 best reported | best at pub: Union Subgraph Neural Networks (AAAI 2023) |
| 124 | MLP | 0.5583
±0.0352 | |
| 194 | GIN-AK+ | 0.3850
±0.0630 | This paper |
| 195 | GIN (backbone) | 0.3830
±0.0640 | This paper |
| 196 | DropGNN | 0.3830
±0.0710 | This paper |
| 198 | ESAN | 0.3790
±0.0630 | This paper |
| 199 | GC-GNN (GCN) | 0.3770
±0.0690 | This paper |
| 202 | SignNet | 0.3750
±0.0640 | This paper |
| 225 | Nested GCN | 0.3120
±0.0670 | This paper |
| 227 | GraphSAGE (backbone) | 0.3070
±0.0630 | This paper |
| 228 | Nested GraphSAGE | 0.3070
±0.0630 | This paper |
| 229 | GNN-RNI | 0.3070
±0.0560 | This paper |
| 231 | GAT (backbone) | 0.3020
±0.0420 | This paper |
| 235 | Nested GAT | 0.2950
±0.0570 | This paper |
| 236 | Nested GIN | 0.2900
±0.0800 | This paper |
| 245 | GCN (backbone) | 0.2730
±0.0550 | This paper |
| # | Model | Accuracy ↑ | Paper |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | GC-GNN (GCN) | 0.9210
±0.0810 | This paper |
| 2 | SUGAR | 0.8403
±0.0133 | |
| 3 | Ortho-g-U-Nets | 0.8387 | |
| 15 | SAGE | 0.8088
±0.0233 | |
| 20 | GIN-AK+ | 0.8030
±0.0310 | This paper |
| 27 | ESAN | 0.7970
±0.0380 | This paper |
| 30 | GraphSNN | 0.7960
±0.0290 | This paper |
| 60 | DropGNN | 0.7850
±0.0600 | This paper |
| 71 | SignNet | 0.7820
±0.0410 | This paper |
| 82 | Nested GIN | 0.7780
±0.0390 | This paper |
| 95 | Nested GraphSAGE | 0.7740
±0.0420 | This paper |
| 113 | Nested GCN | 0.7630
±0.0380 | This paper |
| 118 | Nested GAT | 0.7600
±0.0440 | This paper |
| 123 | GNN-RNI | 0.7580
±0.0300 | This paper |
| 162 | GCN (backbone) | 0.7160
±0.0280 | This paper |
| 163 | GraphSAGE (backbone) | 0.7160
±0.0300 | This paper |
| 167 | GAT (backbone) | 0.7100
±0.0440 | This paper |
| 168 | GIN (backbone) | 0.7050
±0.0360 | This paper |
OGB
| # | Model | ROC-AUC ↑ | Paper |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Multi-RF Fusion with Multi-GNN Blending | 0.8476
±0.0002 | |
| 2 | HyperFusion | 0.8475
±0.0003 | |
| 3 | PAS+FPs | 0.8420
±0.0015 | |
| 9 | GatedGCN | 0.8090
±0.0160 | |
| 98 | ESAN (GIN + ED) | 0.7803
±0.0170 | This paper |
| 109 | GIN | 0.7780
±0.0182 | |
| 125 | GIN (backbone) | 0.7744
±0.0098 | This paper |
| 153 | GN-GIN | 0.7705
±0.0195 | This paper |
| 195 | GN-GCN | 0.7609
±0.0158 | This paper |
| 239 | GCN (backbone) | 0.7501
±0.0140 | This paper |
| # | Model | AP ↑ | Paper |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | GRPE-Large | 0.3150
±0.0010 | |
| 2 | Graphormer | 0.3140 | |
| 3 | Graphormer-FLAG | 0.3139
±0.0032 | |
| 31 | GIN | 0.2902
±0.0017 | |
| 45 | ESAN (GIN + ED) | 0.2782
±0.0036 | This paper |
| 46 | GN-GIN | 0.2781
±0.0043 | This paper |
| 54 | GIN (backbone) | 0.2703
±0.0023 | This paper |
| 76 | GN-GCN | 0.2510
±0.0047 | This paper |
| 82 | GCN (backbone) | 0.2422
±0.0034 | This paper |
