NeurIPS 2023

MAG-GNN: Reinforcement Learning Boosted Graph Neural Network

Lecheng Kong, Jiarui Feng, Hao Liu, Dacheng Tao, Yixin Chen, Muhan Zhang

Main figure for MAG-GNN: Reinforcement Learning Boosted Graph Neural Network

Abstract

While Graph Neural Networks (GNNs) recently became powerful tools in graph learning tasks, considerable efforts have been spent on improving GNNs' structural encoding ability. A particular line of work proposed subgraph GNNs that use subgraph information to improve GNNs' expressivity and achieved great success. However, such effectivity sacrifices the efficiency of GNNs by enumerating all possible subgraphs. In this paper, we analyze the necessity of complete subgraph enumeration and show that a model can achieve a comparable level of expressivity by considering a small subset of the subgraphs. We then formulate the identification of the optimal subset as a combinatorial optimization problem and propose Magnetic Graph Neural Network (MAG-GNN), a reinforcement learning (RL) boosted GNN, to solve the problem. Starting with a candidate subgraph set, MAG-GNN employs an RL agent to iteratively update the subgraphs to locate the most expressive set for prediction. This reduces the exponential complexity of subgraph enumeration to the constant complexity of a subgraph search algorithm while keeping good expressivity. We conduct extensive experiments on many datasets, showing that MAG-GNN achieves competitive performance to state-of-the-art methods and even outperforms many subgraph GNNs. We also demonstrate that MAG-GNN effectively reduces the running time of subgraph GNNs.

Benchmark Results

Tested on 3 datasets 2 baseline values reported too low

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

Classic

ZINC

Global leaderboard →

Default metric is MAE. The paper reports 2 values on MAE and 6 values on RMSE .

#ModelMAE ↓ defaultRMSE ↓Paper
1
TIGT
0.0140 ± 0.0010
—
2
FloydNet
0.0160
—
3
GSSC
0.0190 ± 0.0010
—
7
CIN
—
0.0220 ± 0.0020
RMSE 0.0220 ± 0.0020
This paper
10
SSWL+
—
0.0220 ± 0.0020
RMSE 0.0220 ± 0.0020
This paper
15
I^2GNN
—
0.0230 ± 0.0010
RMSE 0.0230 ± 0.0010
This paper
31
NGNN
—
0.0290 ± 0.0010
RMSE 0.0290 ± 0.0010
This paper
37
MAG-GNN
0.0300 ±0.0020
best reported
—
RMSE —
paper 0.1060 ±0.0140
paper 0.1060 ±0.0140 Δ today 0.0760
61
RNM
—
0.0620 ± 0.0040
RMSE 0.0620 ± 0.0040
This paper
69
GIN
—
0.0880 ± 0.0020
RMSE 0.0880 ± 0.0020
This paper
73
MAG-GNN-PRE
0.0960 ± 0.0090
—
RMSE —
This paper
79
GCN
0.1130 ± 0.0020
—

OGB

#ModelROC-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
8
CIN
0.8094 ±0.0057
This paper
9
GatedGCN
0.8090 ±0.0160
18
GSN
actual #18 vs paper #68 50 places worse
0.8039 ±0.0090
best reported
actual #18 vs paper #68 50 places worse
paper 0.7880 ±0.0082
paper 0.7880 ±0.0082 Δ at pub 0.0159 Δ today 0.0159
25
PF-GNN
0.8015 ±0.0068
This paper
30
SUN
0.8003 ±0.0055
This paper
39
GNNAK+
0.7961 ±0.0119
This paper
42
SSWL+
0.7958 ±0.0035
This paper
62
PNA
0.7905 ±0.0132
This paper
76
I^2GNN
0.7868 ±0.0093
This paper
86
NGNN
0.7834 ±0.0186
This paper
90
MAG-GNN-PRE
0.7830 ±0.0108
This paper
109
GIN
actual #109 vs paper #150 41 places worse
0.7780 ±0.0182
best reported
actual #109 vs paper #150 41 places worse
paper 0.7707 ±0.0149

Difference within reported uncertainty; not counted as underperformance.

paper 0.7707 ±0.0149 Δ at pub 0.0073
144
MAG-GNN
0.7712 ±0.0113
This paper
160
GraphSAGE
0.7690 ±0.0136
165
RNM
0.7679 ±0.0094
This paper

GNNBenchmark

#ModelAccuracy ↑Paper
14
MAG-GNN
1.0000
This paper
9
NGNN
1.0000
This paper
10
GNNAK+
1.0000
This paper
11
SSWL+
1.0000
This paper
12
RNM
1.0000
This paper
13
I^2GNN
1.0000
This paper
1
PPGN
1.0000
2
RW-AgentNet
1.0000
3
AgentNet
1.0000
8
GCN
1.0000
40
GIN
actual #40 vs paper #72 32 places worse
0.9933 ±0.0133
best reported
actual #40 vs paper #72 32 places worse
paper 0.1000
best at pub: GNNBenchmark (JMLR 2023)
paper 0.1000 Δ at pub 0.8933
72
RNI
0.1600
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