ICLR 2023

HoloNets: Spectral Convolutions do extend to Directed Graphs

Christian Koke, Daniel Cremers

Main figure for HoloNets: Spectral Convolutions do extend to Directed Graphs

Abstract

Within the graph learning community, conventional wisdom dictates that spectral convolutional networks may only be deployed on undirected graphs: Only there could the existence of a well-defined graph Fourier transform be guaranteed, so that information may be translated between spatial- and spectral domains. Here we show this traditional reliance on the graph Fourier transform to be superfluous and -- making use of certain advanced tools from complex analysis and spectral theory -- extend spectral convolutions to directed graphs. We provide a frequency-response interpretation of newly developed filters, investigate the influence of the basis used to express filters and discuss the interplay with characteristic operators on which networks are based. In order to thoroughly test the developed theory, we conduct experiments in real world settings, showcasing that directed spectral convolutional networks provide new state of the art results for heterophilic node classification on many datasets and -- as opposed to baselines -- may be rendered stable to resolution-scale varying topological perturbations.

Benchmark Results

Tested on 3 datasets

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

Heterophily Benchmark

#ModelAccuracy ↑Paper
1
Dir-Poly
0.9451 ±0.0022
2
D-CDE
0.9387 ±0.0041
3
LargeScaleNet
0.9358 ±0.0024
9
FaberNet
actual #9 vs paper #10 1 place worse
0.9232 ±0.0030
best reported
actual #9 vs paper #10 1 place worse
paper 0.9224 ±0.0043

Difference within reported uncertainty; not counted as underperformance.

paper 0.9224 ±0.0043 Δ today 0.0008
22
DirGNN
0.9130 ±0.0046
This paper
26
GraphSAGE
0.9106 ±0.0027
135
MLP
0.6665 ±0.0047

LINKX Benchmarks

#ModelAccuracy ↑Paper
1
LargeScaleNet
0.6582 ±0.0036
2
S² DirGCN
0.6495 ±0.0033
3
FaberNet
0.6462 ±0.0101
This paper
5
DirGNN
0.6397 ±0.0030
This paper
31
GCN
0.4602 ±0.0026
56
MLP
0.3670 ±0.0021
#ModelAccuracy ↑Paper
1
FaberNet
0.7510 ±0.0003
This paper
2
LargeScaleNet
0.7505 ±0.0005
3
DirGNN
0.7395 ±0.0005
This paper
16
GCN
0.5102 ±0.0006
32
MLP
0.3150
SOTA performance (not significantly different from the best) Baseline / comparison (this paper) Global context (other papers)