Efficient Subgraph GNNs by Learning Effective Selection Policies
Abstract
Subgraph GNNs are provably expressive neural architectures that learn graph representations from sets of subgraphs. Unfortunately, their applicability is hampered by the computational complexity associated with performing message passing on many subgraphs. In this paper, we consider the problem of learning to select a small subset of the large set of possible subgraphs in a data-driven fashion. We first motivate the problem by proving that there are families of WL-indistinguishable graphs for which there exist efficient subgraph selection policies: small subsets of subgraphs that can already identify all the graphs within the family. We then propose a new approach, called Policy-learn, that learns how to select subgraphs in an iterative manner. We prove that, unlike popular random policies and prior work addressing the same problem, our architecture is able to learn the efficient policies mentioned above. Our experimental results demonstrate that Policy-learn\ outperforms existing baselines across a wide range of datasets.
Benchmark Results
Tested on 3 datasets 2 baseline values reported too low
Tables show presented results in global context (best 3 papers + GCN + MLP).
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 | |
| 55 | Policy-learn T=2 | 0.7913
±0.0060 | This paper |
| 82 | Policy-learn T=5 | 0.7849
±0.0101 | This paper |
| 109 | GIN | 0.7780
±0.0182 best reported | best at pub: GRPE: Relative Positional Encoding for Graph Transformer (2022) Difference within reported uncertainty; not counted as underperformance. |
| 117 | Random T=2 | 0.7755
±0.0124 | This paper |
| 134 | Random T=5 | 0.7730
±0.0256 | This paper |
| 160 | GraphSAGE | 0.7690
±0.0136 | |
| 173 | Full | 0.7654
±0.0137 | This paper |
| 184 | GCN | 0.7630
±0.0030 best reported | best at pub: Motif-based Graph Representation Learning with Application to Chemical Molecules (2022) Difference within reported uncertainty; not counted as underperformance. |
MoleculeNet
| # | Model | ROC-AUC ↑ | Paper |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | HIMP | 0.8740
±0.0050 | |
| 2 | GINE w/ VN | 0.8720
±0.0030 | |
| 3 | NaiveGINe+ K=3 w/ VN | 0.8700
±0.0040 | |
| 14 | GCN | 0.8400
±0.0040 best reported | best at pub: Graph convolutions that can finally model local structure (2020) |
| 24 | GIN | 0.8290
±0.0069 best reported | |
| 133 | Policy-learn T=2 | 0.7747
±0.0082 | This paper |
| 135 | GraphSAGE | 0.7744
±0.0038 | |
| 141 | Policy-learn T=5 | 0.7736
±0.0060 | This paper |
| 166 | Random T=2 | 0.7665
±0.0089 | This paper |
| 167 | Random T=5 | 0.7662
±0.0063 | This paper |
| 178 | Full | 0.7625
±0.0112 | This paper |
GNNBenchmark
| # | Model | Accuracy ↑ | Paper |
|---|---|---|---|
| 15 | Full | 1.0000 | This paper |
| 16 | Random T=2 | 1.0000 | This paper |
| 17 | MPNNs | 1.0000 | This paper |
| 1 | PPGN | 1.0000 | |
| 2 | RW-AgentNet | 1.0000 | |
| 3 | AgentNet | 1.0000 | |
| 8 | GCN | 1.0000 |
