Design your own universe: a physics-informed agnostic method for enhancing graph neural networks

Dai Shi), Andi Han [1], Lequan Lin [1] [2], Yi Guo)., Zhiyong Wang [2], Junbin Gao [2]

Main figure for Design your own universe: a physics-informed agnostic method for enhancing graph neural networks

Abstract

Physics-informed Graph Neural Networks have achieved remarkable performance in learning through graph-structured data by mitigating common GNN challenges such as over-smoothing, over-squashing, and heterophily adaption. Despite these advancements, the development of a simple yet effective paradigm that appropriately integrates previous methods for handling all these challenges is still underway. In this paper, we draw an analogy between the propagation of GNNs and particle systems in physics, proposing a model-agnostic enhancement framework. This framework enriches the graph structure by introducing additional nodes and rewiring connections with both positive and negative weights, guided by node labeling information. We theoretically verify that GNNs enhanced through our approach can effectively circumvent the over-smoothing issue and exhibit robustness against over-squashing. Moreover, we conduct a spectral analysis on the rewired graph to demonstrate that the corresponding GNNs can fit both homophilic and heterophilic graphs. Empirical validations on benchmarks for homophilic, heterophilic graphs, and long-term graph datasets show that GNNs enhanced by our method significantly outperform their original counterparts.

Proposed method: UYGNN

Benchmark Results

Tested on 5 datasets 26 baseline values reported too low

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

Classic

#ModelAccuracy ↑Paper
1
GraphSAGE+CNA
0.9418 ±0.0033
2
GCN+CNA
0.9366 ±0.0048
3
TransformerConv
0.9350 ±0.0058
21
GCN
actual #21 vs paper #573 552 places worse
0.9004
best reported
actual #21 vs paper #573 552 places worse
paper 0.8150 ±0.0050
paper 0.8150 ±0.0050 Δ at pub 0.0854
39
SAGE
0.8911 ±0.0012
44
GAT
actual #44 vs paper #424 380 places worse
0.8897 ±0.0014
best reported
actual #44 vs paper #424 380 places worse
paper 0.8300 ±0.0070
paper 0.8300 ±0.0070 Δ at pub 0.0590 Δ today 0.0597
51
H2GCN
actual #51 vs paper #382 331 places worse
0.8882 ±0.0011
best reported
actual #51 vs paper #382 331 places worse
paper 0.8340 ±0.0050
paper 0.8340 ±0.0050 Δ at pub 0.0447 Δ today 0.0542
77
GPRGNN
actual #77 vs paper #315 238 places worse
0.8826 ±0.0050
best reported
actual #77 vs paper #315 238 places worse
paper 0.8380 ±0.0090
87
GRAND
actual #87 vs paper #434 347 places worse
0.8815
best reported
actual #87 vs paper #434 347 places worse
paper 0.8290 ±0.0140
paper 0.8290 ±0.0140 Δ at pub 0.0525
108
APPNP
actual #108 vs paper #365 257 places worse
0.8787
best reported
actual #108 vs paper #365 257 places worse
paper 0.8350 ±0.0070
best at pub: Orthogonal Graph Neural Networks (AAAI 2021)
paper 0.8350 ±0.0070 Δ at pub 0.0437 Δ today 0.0437
165
GIN
actual #165 vs paper #706 541 places worse
0.8660 ±0.0091
best reported
actual #165 vs paper #706 541 places worse
paper 0.7860 ±0.0120
paper 0.7860 ±0.0120 Δ at pub 0.0320 Δ today 0.0800
235
UYGNN
0.8480 ±0.0030
This paper
237
ACMP
actual #237 vs paper #245 8 places worse
0.8476 ±0.0074
best reported
actual #237 vs paper #245 8 places worse
paper 0.8460 ±0.0050

Difference within reported uncertainty; not counted as underperformance.

paper 0.8460 ±0.0050 Δ today 0.0016
306
UYGAT
0.8400 ±0.0040
This paper
496
Replusion
0.8230 ±0.0080
This paper
546
LEGCN
0.8190 ±0.0210
This paper
547
SJLR
actual #547 vs paper #583 36 places worse
0.8190
best reported
actual #547 vs paper #583 36 places worse
paper 0.8130 ±0.0050

Difference within reported uncertainty; not counted as underperformance.

paper 0.8130 ±0.0050 Δ today 0.0060
724
MLP
actual #724 vs paper #890 166 places worse
0.7768
best reported
actual #724 vs paper #890 166 places worse
paper 0.5510 ±0.0130
paper 0.5510 ±0.0130 Δ at pub 0.2258
#ModelAccuracy ↑Paper
1
CNA
0.9575 ±0.0058
2
IS-GIB
0.9390 ±0.0187
3
EERM
0.9112 ±0.0145
20
APPNP
actual #20 vs paper #140 120 places worse
0.8142 ±0.0026
best reported
actual #20 vs paper #140 120 places worse
paper 0.7590 ±0.0060
paper 0.7590 ±0.0060 Δ at pub 0.0552
32
GPRGNN
actual #32 vs paper #140 108 places worse
0.8102 ±0.0071
best reported
actual #32 vs paper #140 108 places worse
paper 0.7590 ±0.0120
paper 0.7590 ±0.0120 Δ at pub 0.0267 Δ today 0.0512
35
GAT
actual #35 vs paper #457 422 places worse
0.8080 ±0.0026
best reported
actual #35 vs paper #457 422 places worse
paper 0.7200 ±0.0070
paper 0.7200 ±0.0070 Δ at pub 0.0880
44
GCN
actual #44 vs paper #561 517 places worse
0.8033 ±0.0088
best reported
actual #44 vs paper #561 517 places worse
paper 0.7090 ±0.0050
paper 0.7090 ±0.0050 Δ at pub 0.0853 Δ today 0.0943
61
GraphSAGE
0.7923 ±0.0053
111
H2GCN
actual #111 vs paper #316 205 places worse
0.7711 ±0.0157
best reported
actual #111 vs paper #316 205 places worse
paper 0.7310 ±0.0040
122
GRAND
actual #122 vs paper #570 448 places worse
0.7657
best reported
actual #122 vs paper #570 448 places worse
paper 0.7080 ±0.0110
paper 0.7080 ±0.0110 Δ at pub 0.0577
132
UYGAT
0.7610 ±0.0080
This paper
172
UYGNN
0.7520 ±0.0040
This paper
180
ACMP
0.7500 ±0.0100
This paper
309
LEGCN
0.7320 ±0.0140
This paper
350
MLP
actual #350 vs paper #834 484 places worse
0.7289 ±0.0010
best reported
actual #350 vs paper #834 484 places worse
paper 0.5910 ±0.0050
paper 0.5910 ±0.0050 Δ at pub 0.1280 Δ today 0.1379
389
GIN
actual #389 vs paper #519 130 places worse
0.7250 ±0.0080
best reported
actual #389 vs paper #519 130 places worse
paper 0.7140 ±0.0110

Difference within reported uncertainty; not counted as underperformance.

paper 0.7140 ±0.0110 Δ at pub 0.0110
474
Replusion
0.7190 ±0.0050
This paper
587
SJLR
0.7060 ±0.0040
This paper
#ModelAccuracy ↑Paper
1
LGTL
0.9518 ±0.0011
2
MixHop (LO)
0.9513 ±0.0038
3
GraphSAGE (LO)
0.9511 ±0.0036
16
H2GCN
actual #16 vs paper #556 540 places worse
0.9361 ±0.0013
best reported
actual #16 vs paper #556 540 places worse
paper 0.7920 ±0.0030
paper 0.7920 ±0.0030 Δ at pub 0.1029 Δ today 0.1441
17
APPNP
actual #17 vs paper #585 568 places worse
0.9355 ±0.0060
best reported
actual #17 vs paper #585 568 places worse
paper 0.7900 ±0.0030
18
GCN
actual #18 vs paper #585 567 places worse
0.9296 ±0.0015
best reported
actual #18 vs paper #585 567 places worse
paper 0.7900 ±0.0030
20
GAT
actual #20 vs paper #632 612 places worse
0.9233 ±0.0018
best reported
actual #20 vs paper #632 612 places worse
paper 0.7850 ±0.0030
101
GPRGNN
actual #101 vs paper #474 373 places worse
0.8911 ±0.0008
best reported
actual #101 vs paper #474 373 places worse
paper 0.7980 ±0.0080
paper 0.7980 ±0.0080 Δ at pub 0.0931
109
GRAND
actual #109 vs paper #556 447 places worse
0.8902
best reported
actual #109 vs paper #556 447 places worse
paper 0.7920 ±0.0150
paper 0.7920 ±0.0150 Δ at pub 0.0982
116
SAGE
0.8881 ±0.0015
157
GIN
actual #157 vs paper #743 586 places worse
0.8810
best reported
actual #157 vs paper #743 586 places worse
paper 0.7690 ±0.0060
paper 0.7690 ±0.0060 Δ at pub 0.1120
210
MLP
actual #210 vs paper #827 617 places worse
0.8690 ±0.0074
best reported
actual #210 vs paper #827 617 places worse
paper 0.7140 ±0.0040
paper 0.7140 ±0.0040 Δ at pub 0.1550
467
UYGNN
0.7990 ±0.0050
This paper
499
UYGAT
0.7960 ±0.0150
This paper
550
Replusion
0.7930 ±0.0120
This paper
631
SJLR
actual #631 vs paper #675 44 places worse
0.7860
best reported
actual #631 vs paper #675 44 places worse
paper 0.7800 ±0.0030
paper 0.7800 ±0.0030 Δ today 0.0060
681
ACMP
0.7800 ±0.0030
This paper
721
LEGCN
0.7740 ±0.0050
This paper

Heterophilic Graphs

#ModelAccuracy ↑Paper
1
P^2GNN
0.9672 ±0.0147
2
DoG
0.9660 ±0.0210
3
GPF-plus
0.9583 ±0.0419
28
GPRGNN
actual #28 vs paper #302 274 places worse
0.9295 ±0.0131
best reported
actual #28 vs paper #302 274 places worse
paper 0.7590 ±0.0920
paper 0.7590 ±0.0920 Δ at pub 0.1702 Δ today 0.1705
34
MLP
actual #34 vs paper #34
0.9230 ±0.0070
actual #34 vs paper #34
paper 0.9230 ±0.0070

Improvement within reported uncertainty; not highlighted.

paper 0.9230 ±0.0070 Δ at pub 0.0004
40
H2GCN
actual #40 vs paper #144 104 places worse
0.9189 ±0.0393
best reported
actual #40 vs paper #144 104 places worse
paper 0.8510 ±0.0520

Difference within reported uncertainty; not counted as underperformance.

paper 0.8510 ±0.0520 Δ at pub 0.0080 Δ today 0.0679
46
APPNP
actual #46 vs paper #170 124 places worse
0.9131 ±0.0197
best reported
actual #46 vs paper #170 124 places worse
paper 0.8390 ±0.0070
paper 0.8390 ±0.0070 Δ at pub 0.0741
53
GraphSAGE
0.9000 ±0.0365
56
UYGAT
0.8980 ±0.0250
This paper
77
UYGNN
0.8890 ±0.0150
This paper
116
ACMP
actual #116 vs paper #135 19 places worse
0.8620 ±0.0300
best reported
actual #116 vs paper #135 19 places worse
paper 0.8540 ±0.0420

Difference within reported uncertainty; not counted as underperformance.

paper 0.8540 ±0.0420 Δ at pub 0.0080 Δ today 0.0080
171
Replusion
0.8390 ±0.0150
This paper
208
LEGCN
0.8180 ±0.0290
This paper
211
GAT
actual #211 vs paper #266 55 places worse
0.8162 ±0.0645
best reported
actual #211 vs paper #266 55 places worse
paper 0.7880 ±0.0090

Difference within reported uncertainty; not counted as underperformance.

paper 0.7880 ±0.0090 Δ at pub 0.0120 Δ today 0.0282
217
GRAND
actual #217 vs paper #239 22 places worse
0.8140 ±0.0350
best reported
actual #217 vs paper #239 22 places worse
paper 0.8020 ±0.0150

Difference within reported uncertainty; not counted as underperformance.

paper 0.8020 ±0.0150 Δ today 0.0120
241
SJLR
0.8010 ±0.0090
This paper
257
GCN
actual #257 vs paper #305 48 places worse
0.7933 ±0.0447
best reported
actual #257 vs paper #305 48 places worse
paper 0.7570 ±0.0100
best today: Graph Wave Networks (WWW 2025)

Difference within reported uncertainty; not counted as underperformance.

paper 0.7570 ±0.0100 Δ at pub 0.0270 Δ today 0.0363
326
GIN
0.7460 ±0.0080
This paper
#ModelAccuracy ↑Paper
1
P^2GNN
0.9541 ±0.0272
2
ACM-GCN
0.9480 ±0.0380
3
RF-GCN
0.9429
21
APPNP
actual #21 vs paper #21
0.9181 ±0.0196
best reported
actual #21 vs paper #21
paper 0.9180 ±0.0060

Difference within reported uncertainty; not counted as underperformance.

paper 0.9180 ±0.0060 Δ at pub 0.0001
22
GPRGNN
actual #22 vs paper #91 69 places worse
0.9157 ±0.0196
best reported
actual #22 vs paper #91 69 places worse
paper 0.8500 ±0.0520

Difference within reported uncertainty; not counted as underperformance.

paper 0.8500 ±0.0520 Δ at pub 0.0637 Δ today 0.0657
24
MLP
actual #24 vs paper #24
0.9136 ±0.0070
best reported
actual #24 vs paper #24
paper 0.9130 ±0.0070

Difference within reported uncertainty; not counted as underperformance.

paper 0.9130 ±0.0070 Δ at pub 0.0006
44
UYGAT
0.8740 ±0.0130
This paper
67
Replusion
0.8630 ±0.0280
This paper
68
H2GCN
actual #68 vs paper #91 23 places worse
0.8510 ±0.0610
actual #68 vs paper #91 23 places worse
paper 0.8510 ±0.0610
prev best: Graph-Coupled Oscillator Networks (ICML 2022)

Improvement within reported uncertainty; not highlighted.

paper 0.8510 ±0.0610 Δ at pub 0.0240
79
UYGNN
0.8570 ±0.0160
This paper
84
ACMP
actual #84 vs paper #105 21 places worse
0.8540 ±0.0700
best reported
actual #84 vs paper #105 21 places worse
paper 0.8430 ±0.0480

Difference within reported uncertainty; not counted as underperformance.

paper 0.8430 ±0.0480 Δ at pub 0.0110 Δ today 0.0110
138
SAGE
0.8269
142
GRAND
actual #142 vs paper #265 123 places worse
0.8246 ±0.0709
best reported
actual #142 vs paper #265 123 places worse
paper 0.7220 ±0.0310

Difference within reported uncertainty; not counted as underperformance.

paper 0.7220 ±0.0310 Δ at pub 0.1000 Δ today 0.1026
158
GAT
actual #158 vs paper #222 64 places worse
0.8190 ±0.0540
best reported
actual #158 vs paper #222 64 places worse
paper 0.7600 ±0.0100
paper 0.7600 ±0.0100 Δ at pub 0.0590
165
LEGCN
0.8120 ±0.0360
This paper
170
GCN
actual #170 vs paper #316 146 places worse
0.8082 ±0.0360
best reported
actual #170 vs paper #316 146 places worse
paper 0.6650 ±0.1380

Difference within reported uncertainty; not counted as underperformance.

paper 0.6650 ±0.1380 Δ at pub 0.1270 Δ today 0.1432
201
GIN
0.7800 ±0.0190
This paper
268
SJLR
0.7190 ±0.0190
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