KDD 2024

Graph Mamba: Towards Learning on Graphs with State Space Models

Ali Behrouz, Farnoosh Hashemi

Main figure for Graph Mamba: Towards Learning on Graphs with State Space Models

Abstract

Graph Neural Networks (GNNs) have shown promising potential in graph representation learning. The majority of GNNs define a local message-passing mechanism, propagating information over the graph by stacking multiple layers. These methods, however, are known to suffer from two major limitations: over-squashing and poor capturing of long-range dependencies. Recently, Graph Transformers (GTs) emerged as a powerful alternative to Message-Passing Neural Networks (MPNNs). GTs, however, have quadratic computational cost, lack inductive biases on graph structures, and rely on complex Positional Encodings (PE). In this paper, we show that while Transformers, complex message-passing, and PE are sufficient for good performance in practice, neither is necessary. Motivated by the recent success of State Space Models (SSMs), we present Graph Mamba Networks (GMNs), a framework for a new class of GNNs based on selective SSMs. We discuss the new challenges when adapting SSMs to graph-structured data, and present four required steps to design GMNs, where we choose (1) Neighborhood Tokenization, (2) Token Ordering, (3) Architecture of SSM Encoder, and (4) Local Encoding. We provide theoretical justification for the power of GMNs, and experimentally show that GMNs attain an outstanding performance in various benchmark datasets. The code is available in this link.

Benchmark Results

Tested on 12 datasets Non-standard metric on 1 dataset

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

LRGB

#ModelMAE ↓Paper
1
GCN
0.2421 ±0.0016
2
IPR-MPNN
0.2422 ±0.0007
3
TANGO-GPS
0.2422 ±0.0014
5
GIN
0.2429 ±0.0019
50
GMN
0.2473 ±0.0025
This paper
71
S4G
0.2485 ±0.0017
This paper
105
GPS + Mamba
0.2518 ±0.0012
This paper
201
MLP
0.4351 ±0.0008
#ModelAP ↑Paper
1
S^2GCN
0.7311 ±0.0066
2
S4G
0.7293 ±0.0004
This paper
3
BuNN
0.7276 ±0.0065
4
GCN
0.7261 ±0.0011
21
GRED
actual #21 vs paper #27 6 places worse
0.7085 ±0.0027
best reported
actual #21 vs paper #27 6 places worse
paper 0.7041 ±0.0049

Difference within reported uncertainty; not counted as underperformance.

paper 0.7041 ±0.0049 Δ at pub 0.0044 Δ today 0.0044
24
GMN
0.7071 ±0.0083
This paper
77
GPS + Mamba
0.6624 ±0.0079
This paper
181
MLP
0.4060 ±0.0021

PascalVOC-SP

Global leaderboard →
Non-default metric. This paper reports F1 score; the dataset default is F1. Values below use F1 score only.

Sorted by F1 score. Highlighted rows are from other papers.

#ModelF1 score ↑Paper
1
GMN
0.4393 ±0.0112
This paper
2
GPS + Mamba
0.4180 ±0.0120
This paper
#ModelF1 ↑Paper
1
FloydNet
0.4901
2
CRaWl
0.4588 ±0.0079
3
GPS
0.4440 ±0.0065
8
GMN
0.3974 ±0.0101
This paper
13
GPS + Mamba
0.3895 ±0.0125
This paper
16
GatedGCN
0.3880 ±0.0040
45
GCN
0.2078 ±0.0031
74
MLP
0.0310 ±0.0160

Heterophily Benchmark

#ModelAccuracy ↑Paper
1
Dir-Poly
0.9451 ±0.0022
2
D-CDE
0.9387 ±0.0041
3
LargeScaleNet
0.9358 ±0.0024
26
GraphSAGE
0.9106 ±0.0027
51
GMN
0.8769 ±0.0050
This paper
75
GPS + Mamba
0.8310 ±0.0028
This paper
135
MLP
0.6665 ±0.0047
#ModelAccuracy ↑Paper
1
UniGAP
0.6375 ±0.0110
2
H2GCN + HalfHop
0.5961 ±0.0100
3
GraphSAGE + HalfHop
0.5897 ±0.0150
12
SAGE
0.5569 ±0.0023
25
GMN
0.5407 ±0.0031
This paper
84
MLP
0.5058
147
GPS + Mamba
0.4513 ±0.0097
This paper
#ModelROC-AUC ↑Paper
1
BuNN
0.9899 ±0.0016
2
DC-GNN
0.9850 ±0.0021
3
Tango -GPS
0.9839 ±0.0054
42
GraphSAGE
0.9358 ±0.0005
74
GMN
0.9101 ±0.0023
This paper
88
GPS + Mamba
0.8993 ±0.0054
This paper
156
MLP
0.5099 ±0.0147
#ModelROC-AUC ↑Paper
1
Polynormer-r
0.8591 ±0.0074
2
DC-GNN
0.8588 ±0.0081
3
TANGO-GPS
0.8566 ±0.0101
26
GMN
0.8452 ±0.0021
This paper
48
GPS + Mamba
0.8370 ±0.0105
This paper
50
GCN
0.8364 ±0.0067
139
MLP
0.7362 ±0.0020

GNNBenchmark

#ModelAccuracy ↑Paper
1
Schrödinger
0.9913 ±0.0004
2
CNN
0.9907 ±0.0007
3
MPNN
0.9895 ±0.0006
11
GatedGCN
0.9855 ±0.0002
26
GMN
0.9839 ±0.0018
This paper
27
GRED
actual #27 vs paper #39 12 places worse
0.9838 ±0.0001
best reported
actual #27 vs paper #39 12 places worse
paper 0.9822 ±0.0095

Difference within reported uncertainty; not counted as underperformance.

paper 0.9822 ±0.0095 Δ at pub 0.0016
32
GIN
0.9833 ±0.0011
41
GPS + Mamba
0.9821 ±0.0004
This paper
112
S4G
0.9637 ±0.0017
This paper
126
MLP
0.9534 ±0.0014
#ModelAccuracy ↑Paper
1
RandAlign
0.7942 ±0.0007
2
differential encoding
0.7907 ±0.0027
3
PPGT
0.7856 ±0.0070
5
GRED
actual #5 vs paper #15 10 places worse
0.7685 ±0.0019
best reported
actual #5 vs paper #15 10 places worse
paper 0.7537 ±0.6210

Difference within reported uncertainty; not counted as underperformance.

paper 0.7537 ±0.6210 Δ at pub 0.0148
14
GMN
0.7576 ±0.0042
This paper
37
GPS + Mamba
0.7341 ±0.0015
This paper
62
GatedGCN
0.7133 ±0.0039
66
S4G
0.7065 ±0.0033
This paper
92
GraphSAGE
0.6690 ±0.0020
126
MLP
0.5634 ±0.0018
#ModelAccuracy ↑Paper
1
DeepGraph (48)
0.9066 ±0.0006
2
GRIT (our run)
0.9041 ±0.0023
3
GRIT 2-QiQRW
0.9016 ±0.0045
10
GMN
0.8714 ±0.0012
This paper
16
S4G
0.8687 ±0.0002
This paper
34
GRED
actual #34 vs paper #34
0.8676 ±0.0200
actual #34 vs paper #34
paper 0.8676 ±0.0200

Improvement within reported uncertainty; not highlighted.

paper 0.8676 ±0.0200 Δ at pub 0.0000
57
GPS + Mamba
0.8660 ±0.0007
This paper
66
GatedGCN
0.8651 ±0.0008
88
GCN
0.8561 ±0.0003
123
MLP
0.5052

Other Graph Benchmarks

#ModelAccuracy ↑Paper
1
GMN
0.9415 ±0.0020
This paper
2
DirGraphSSM
0.9409 ±0.0023
3
DAG+SAT-plus
0.9407 ±0.0020
10
GPS + Mamba
0.9311 ±0.0042
This paper
22
GIN
0.8898 ±0.0055
SOTA performance (not significantly different from the best) Baseline / comparison (this paper) Global context (other papers)