ICLR 2023

Equivariant Matrix Function Neural Networks

Ilyes Batatia, L. Schaaf, Huajie Chen, Gábor Csányi, Christoph Ortner, Felix A. Faber

Main figure for Equivariant Matrix Function Neural Networks

Abstract

Graph Neural Networks (GNNs), especially message-passing neural networks (MPNNs), have emerged as powerful architectures for learning on graphs in diverse applications. However, MPNNs face challenges when modeling non-local interactions in graphs such as large conjugated molecules, and social networks due to oversmoothing and oversquashing. Although Spectral GNNs and traditional neural networks such as recurrent neural networks and transformers mitigate these challenges, they often lack generalizability, or fail to capture detailed structural relationships or symmetries in the data. To address these concerns, we introduce Matrix Function Neural Networks (MFNs), a novel architecture that parameterizes non-local interactions through analytic matrix equivariant functions. Employing resolvent expansions offers a straightforward implementation and the potential for linear scaling with system size. The MFN architecture achieves state-of-the-art performance in standard graph benchmarks, such as the ZINC and TU datasets, and is able to capture intricate non-local interactions in quantum systems, paving the way to new state-of-the-art force fields. The code and the datasets will be made public.

Proposed method: MFN

Benchmark Results

Tested on 3 datasets

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
93
MFN
0.9150 ±0.0735
This paper
403
MLP
0.8660 ±0.0495
#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
141
MFN
0.7618 ±0.0407
This paper
149
MLP
0.7600 ±0.0320
#ModelAccuracy ↑Paper
1
GMN
0.7866
2
MemGNN
0.7550
3
TFGW SP
0.7510 ±0.0500
9
MFN
0.7290 ±0.0755
This paper
17
GatedGCN
0.7000 ±0.0494
26
GraphSAGE
0.6817 ±0.0545
124
MLP
0.5583 ±0.0352
SOTA performance (not significantly different from the best) Proposed method (this paper) Global context (other papers)