NeurIPS 2023

SE(3)-Invariant Multiparameter Persistent Homology for Chiral-Sensitive Molecular Property Prediction

Andac Demir, F. Prael, B. Kiziltan

Main figure for SE(3)-Invariant Multiparameter Persistent Homology for Chiral-Sensitive Molecular Property Prediction

Abstract

In this study, we present a novel computational method for generating molecular fingerprints using multiparameter persistent homology (MPPH). This technique holds considerable significance for key areas such as drug discovery and materials science, where precise molecular property prediction is vital. By integrating SE(3)-invariance with Vietoris-Rips persistent homology, we effectively capture the three-dimensional representations of molecular chirality. Chirality, an intrinsic feature of stereochemistry, is dictated by the spatial orientation of atoms within a molecule, defining its unique 3D configuration. This non-superimposable mirror image property directly influences the molecular interactions, thereby serving as an essential factor in molecular property prediction. We explore the underlying topologies and patterns in molecular structures by applying Vietoris-Rips persistent homology across varying scales and parameters such as atomic weight, partial charge, bond type, and chirality. Our method's efficacy can be further improved by incorporating additional parameters such as aromaticity, orbital hybridization, bond polarity, conjugated systems, as well as bond and torsion angles. Additionally, we leverage Stochastic Gradient Langevin Boosting (SGLB) in a Bayesian ensemble of Gradient Boosting Decision Trees (GBDT) to obtain aleatoric and epistemic uncertainty estimates for gradient boosting models. Using these uncertainty estimates, we prioritize high-uncertainty samples for active learning and model fine-tuning, benefiting scenarios where data labeling is costly or time consuming. Our approach offers unique insights into molecular structure, distinguishing it from traditional single-parameter or single-scale analyses. When compared to conventional graph neural networks (GNNs) which usually suffer from oversmoothing and oversquashing, MPPH provides a more comprehensive and interpretable characterization of molecular data topology. We substantiate our approach with theoretical stability guarantees and demonstrate its superior performance over existing state-of-the-art methods in predicting molecular properties through extensive evaluations on the MoleculeNet benchmark datasets.

Benchmark Results

Tested on 6 datasets 9 baseline values reported too low

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

MoleculeNet

#ModelROC-AUC ↑Paper
1
ProtoMol
0.9140 ±0.0030
2
MMSG
0.9080 ±0.0050
3
MemGNN
0.9070
6
SE(3)-I MPPH
0.8970 ±0.0120
This paper
17
ECFP-4 + RF
0.8810 ±0.0270
This paper
20
D-MPNN
actual #20 vs paper #20
0.8780 ±0.0320
actual #20 vs paper #20
paper 0.8780 ±0.0320

Improvement within reported uncertainty; not highlighted.

paper 0.8780 ±0.0320 Δ at pub 0.0130
43
GIN
0.8646 ±0.0081
65
GraphConv
0.8540 ±0.0110
This paper
138
Node-MPN
0.8150 ±0.0440
This paper
167
Weave
actual #167 vs paper #199 32 places worse
0.8060 ±0.0020
best reported
actual #167 vs paper #199 32 places worse
paper 0.7910 ±0.0080
best at pub: Memory-Based Graph Networks (ICLR 2020)
paper 0.7910 ±0.0080 Δ at pub 0.0150
183
3D Infomax
actual #183 vs paper #188 5 places worse
0.7970 ±0.0154
best reported
actual #183 vs paper #188 5 places worse
paper 0.7940 ±0.0190

Difference within reported uncertainty; not counted as underperformance.

paper 0.7940 ±0.0190 Δ at pub 0.0030 Δ today 0.0030
213
GraphCL
actual #213 vs paper #226 13 places worse
0.7820 ±0.0120
best reported
actual #213 vs paper #226 13 places worse
paper 0.7720 ±0.0400

Difference within reported uncertainty; not counted as underperformance.

paper 0.7720 ±0.0400 Δ at pub 0.0100
239
SchNet
actual #239 vs paper #250 11 places worse
0.7660 ±0.0110
best reported
actual #239 vs paper #250 11 places worse
paper 0.7500 ±0.0330

Difference within reported uncertainty; not counted as underperformance.

paper 0.7500 ±0.0330 Δ at pub 0.0160
258
MGCN
0.7340 ±0.0300
This paper
#ModelROC-AUC ↑Paper
1
MAGPrompt+
0.9432 ±0.0238
2
CamS-LLaMA
0.9420
3
SE(3)-I MPPH
0.9400 ±0.0210
This paper
14
ECFP-4 + RF
0.9240 ±0.0240
This paper
26
D-MPNN
actual #26 vs paper #26
0.9130 ±0.0260
actual #26 vs paper #26
paper 0.9130 ±0.0260
27
Node-MPN
0.9130 ±0.0410
This paper
34
GIN
0.8875 ±0.0049
36
GraphCL
actual #36 vs paper #119 83 places worse
0.8870 ±0.0190
best reported
actual #36 vs paper #119 83 places worse
paper 0.7110 ±0.0200
paper 0.7110 ±0.0200 Δ at pub 0.1760
42
GraphConv
0.8770 ±0.0360
This paper
41
3D Infomax
actual #41 vs paper #174 133 places worse
0.8770 ±0.0140
best reported
actual #41 vs paper #174 133 places worse
paper 0.6910 ±0.0110
paper 0.6910 ±0.0110 Δ at pub 0.1860
52
MGCN
0.8500 ±0.0640
This paper
53
SchNet
actual #53 vs paper #53
0.8480 ±0.0220
best reported
actual #53 vs paper #53
paper 0.8470 ±0.0240

Difference within reported uncertainty; not counted as underperformance.

paper 0.8470 ±0.0240 Δ at pub 0.0010
56
Weave
0.8370 ±0.0650
This paper
#ModelROC-AUC ↑Paper
1
SE(3)-I MPPH
0.9930 ±0.0040
This paper
2
KA-GCN
0.9920 ±0.0050
3
KA-GAT
0.9910 ±0.0050
19
GCN
0.9130 ±0.0170
23
D-MPNN
actual #23 vs paper #28 5 places worse
0.9060 ±0.0070
best reported
actual #23 vs paper #28 5 places worse
paper 0.8940 ±0.0270

Difference within reported uncertainty; not counted as underperformance.

paper 0.8940 ±0.0270 Δ at pub 0.0120 Δ today 0.0120
38
Node-MPN
0.8790 ±0.0540
This paper
52
ECFP-4 + RF
0.8590 ±0.0230
This paper
60
GraphConv
actual #60 vs paper #60
0.8450 ±0.0510
actual #60 vs paper #60
paper 0.8450 ±0.0510
paper 0.8450 ±0.0510 Δ at pub 0.1381
70
Weave
0.8230 ±0.0230
This paper
89
3D Infomax
actual #89 vs paper #223 134 places worse
0.7990 ±0.0349
best reported
actual #89 vs paper #223 134 places worse
paper 0.5940 ±0.0320
97
GraphCL
actual #97 vs paper #243 146 places worse
0.7890 ±0.0420
best reported
actual #97 vs paper #243 146 places worse
paper 0.5110 ±0.0550
paper 0.5110 ±0.0550 Δ at pub 0.2780 Δ today 0.2780
164
SchNet
0.7170 ±0.0420
This paper
211
MGCN
0.6340 ±0.0420
This paper
#ModelRMSE ↓Paper
1
Graphormer-SPIS
0.4840 ±0.0050
2
Graphormer-SPD
0.4920 ±0.0040
3
conan-FGW
0.5140 ±0.0190
7
GCN
0.5640 ±0.0150
20
Weave
actual #20 vs paper #108 88 places worse
0.6100 ±0.0700
best reported
actual #20 vs paper #108 88 places worse
paper 1.1580 ±0.0550
best at pub: MoleculeNet (2017)
paper 1.1580 ±0.0550 Δ at pub 0.5480
23
SE(3)-I MPPH
0.6120 ±0.0830
This paper
27
D-MPNN
actual #27 vs paper #81 54 places worse
0.6350 ±0.0270
best reported
actual #27 vs paper #81 54 places worse
paper 0.9800 ±0.2580

Difference within reported uncertainty; not counted as underperformance.

paper 0.9800 ±0.2580 Δ at pub 0.3450
65
3D Infomax
0.8940 ±0.0280
This paper
79
GraphCL
0.9590 ±0.0470
This paper
90
SchNet
1.0450 ±0.0640
This paper
93
GraphConv
1.0680 ±0.0500
This paper
110
Node-MPN
1.1670 ±0.4300
This paper
120
MGCN
1.2660 ±0.1470
This paper
125
ECFP-4 + RF
1.3990 ±0.1770
This paper
#ModelRMSE ↓Paper
1
SE(3)-I MPPH
0.3540 ±0.0530
This paper
2
ECFP-4 + RF
0.5600 ±0.0660
This paper
3
GPSE + GPS
0.6820
9
GraphConv
actual #9 vs paper #91 82 places worse
0.9630
best reported
actual #9 vs paper #91 82 places worse
paper 2.9000 ±0.1350
paper 2.9000 ±0.1350 Δ at pub 1.9370
12
D-MPNN
actual #12 vs paper #12
1.0100 ±0.0640
actual #12 vs paper #12
paper 1.0100 ±0.0640
19
Weave
actual #19 vs paper #70 51 places worse
1.2200 ±0.2800
best reported
actual #19 vs paper #70 51 places worse
paper 2.3980 ±0.2500
best at pub: MoleculeNet (2017)
paper 2.3980 ±0.2500 Δ at pub 1.1780
59
Node-MPN
2.1850 ±0.9520
This paper
63
3D Infomax
actual #63 vs paper #67 4 places worse
2.2300 ±0.2600
best reported
actual #63 vs paper #67 4 places worse
paper 2.3370 ±0.2270

Difference within reported uncertainty; not counted as underperformance.

paper 2.3370 ±0.2270 Δ today 0.1070
69
GIN
2.3460 ±0.1220
101
GraphCL
actual #101 vs paper #111 10 places worse
3.1660 ±0.0270
best reported
actual #101 vs paper #111 10 places worse
paper 3.7440 ±0.2920
103
SchNet
actual #103 vs paper #103
3.2150 ±0.7550
actual #103 vs paper #103
paper 3.2150 ±0.7550

Improvement within reported uncertainty; not highlighted.

paper 3.2150 ±0.7550 Δ at pub 0.0050
106
MGCN
actual #106 vs paper #106
3.3490 ±0.0970
actual #106 vs paper #106
paper 3.3490 ±0.0970

Improvement within reported uncertainty; not highlighted.

paper 3.3490 ±0.0970 Δ at pub 0.0010
#ModelRMSE ↓Paper
1
MemGNN
0.5560 ±0.0230
2
ProtoS-L2
0.5800 ±0.0160
3
ProtoW-L2
0.6040 ±0.0140
6
D-MPNN
0.6460 ±0.0410
This paper
7
GCN
0.6550 ±0.0360
13
Node-MPN
0.6720 ±0.0510
This paper
16
3D Infomax
0.6950 ±0.0120
This paper
19
ECFP-4 + RF
0.7060 ±0.0110
This paper
23
GraphConv
0.7120 ±0.0490
This paper
24
GraphCL
0.7140 ±0.0110
This paper
26
Weave
actual #26 vs paper #58 32 places worse
0.7150 ±0.0350
best reported
actual #26 vs paper #58 32 places worse
paper 0.8130 ±0.0420
best at pub: MoleculeNet (2017)
paper 0.8130 ±0.0420 Δ at pub 0.0980
39
SE(3)-I MPPH
0.7380 ±0.0250
This paper
81
SchNet
0.9090 ±0.0980
This paper
94
MGCN
1.1130 ±0.0410
This paper
SOTA performance (not significantly different from the best) 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 at pub — reported value improved over the best known when published Best today — OK at publication; today's leaderboard best is elsewhere