NeurIPS 2024

Unsupervised Graph Neural Architecture Search with Disentangled Self-supervision

Zeyang Zhang, Xin Wang, Ziwei Zhang, Guangyao Shen, Shiqi Shen, Wenwu Zhu

Main figure for Unsupervised Graph Neural Architecture Search with Disentangled Self-supervision

Abstract

The existing graph neural architecture search (GNAS) methods heavily rely on supervised labels during the search process, failing to handle ubiquitous scenarios where supervisions are not available. In this paper, we study the problem of unsupervised graph neural architecture search, which remains unexplored in the literature. The key problem is to discover the latent graph factors that drive the formation of graph data as well as the underlying relations between the factors and the optimal neural architectures. Handling this problem is challenging given that the latent graph factors together with architectures are highly entangled due to the nature of the graph and the complexity of the neural architecture search process. To address the challenge, we propose a novel Disentangled Self-supervised Graph Neural Architecture Search (DSGAS) model, which is able to discover the optimal architectures capturing various latent graph factors in a self-supervised fashion based on unlabeled graph data. Specifically, we first design a disentangled graph super-network capable of incorporating multiple architectures with factor-wise disentanglement, which are optimized simultaneously. Then, we estimate the performance of architectures under different factors by our proposed self-supervised training with joint architecture-graph disentanglement. Finally, we propose a contrastive search with architecture augmentations to discover architectures with factor-specific expertise. Extensive experiments on 11 real-world datasets demonstrate that the proposed DSGAS model is able to achieve state-of-the-art performance against several baseline methods in an unsupervised manner.

Proposed method: DSGAS

Benchmark Results

Tested on 4 datasets 13 baseline values reported too low

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

Classic

#ModelAccuracy ↑Paper
1
GraphTARIF
0.9703 ±0.0019
2
GAT
actual #2 vs paper #378 376 places worse
0.9669 ±0.0014
best reported
actual #2 vs paper #378 376 places worse
paper 0.9140 ±0.0060
3
GAT+T
0.9660 ±0.0007
7
SAGE
0.9643 ±0.0027
8
GCN
actual #8 vs paper #408 400 places worse
0.9632 ±0.0008
best reported
actual #8 vs paper #408 400 places worse
paper 0.9080 ±0.0060
56
GraphSAGE
actual #56 vs paper #471 415 places worse
0.9508 ±0.0026
best reported
actual #56 vs paper #471 415 places worse
paper 0.8920 ±0.0070
paper 0.8920 ±0.0070 Δ at pub 0.0588
177
DSGAS
0.9330 ±0.0030
This paper
290
Random
actual #290 vs paper #399 109 places worse
0.9244 ±0.0002
best reported
actual #290 vs paper #399 109 places worse
paper 0.9110 ±0.0060
paper 0.9110 ±0.0060 Δ at pub 0.0134
328
GIN
actual #328 vs paper #399 71 places worse
0.9211 ±0.0032
best reported
actual #328 vs paper #399 71 places worse
paper 0.9110 ±0.0070
best at pub: Union Subgraph Neural Networks (AAAI 2023)

Difference within reported uncertainty; not counted as underperformance.

paper 0.9110 ±0.0070 Δ at pub 0.0101
341
GASSO
0.9200 ±0.0030
This paper
372
GraphConv
0.9150 ±0.0050
This paper
373
DARTS
0.9150 ±0.0060
This paper
390
MLP
actual #390 vs paper #495 105 places worse
0.9128 ±0.0063
best reported
actual #390 vs paper #495 105 places worse
paper 0.8740 ±0.0080
paper 0.8740 ±0.0080 Δ at pub 0.0388
468
GraphNAS
0.8930 ±0.0070
This paper
#ModelAccuracy ↑Paper
1
GraphTARIF
0.9461 ±0.0017
2
GCN
0.9412 ±0.0008
3
GAT
0.9398 ±0.0022
8
SAGE
0.9351 ±0.0006
266
DSGAS
0.8660 ±0.0040
This paper
313
GASSO
0.8490 ±0.0040
This paper
320
MLP
0.8463
477
GraphNAS
0.6900 ±0.0060
This paper
#ModelAccuracy ↑Paper
1
GrokFormer
0.9831 ±0.0018
2
PolyFormer
0.9808 ±0.0027
3
SGFormer
0.9796 ±0.0081
6
GAT
actual #6 vs paper #99 93 places worse
0.9782 ±0.0028
best reported
actual #6 vs paper #99 93 places worse
paper 0.9560 ±0.0010
paper 0.9560 ±0.0010 Δ at pub 0.0103 Δ today 0.0222
9
GCN
actual #9 vs paper #84 75 places worse
0.9774 ±0.0035
best reported
actual #9 vs paper #84 75 places worse
paper 0.9570 ±0.0010
paper 0.9570 ±0.0010 Δ at pub 0.0080 Δ today 0.0204
17
SAGE
0.9739 ±0.0018
43
GraphSAGE
actual #43 vs paper #125 82 places worse
0.9649 ±0.0006
best reported
actual #43 vs paper #125 82 places worse
paper 0.9540 ±0.0010
paper 0.9540 ±0.0010 Δ at pub 0.0109
58
MLP
actual #58 vs paper #171 113 places worse
0.9597 ±0.0007
best reported
actual #58 vs paper #171 113 places worse
paper 0.9460 ±0.0010
paper 0.9460 ±0.0010 Δ at pub 0.0103 Δ today 0.0137
86
DSGAS
0.9570 ±0.0010
This paper
85
GASSO
0.9570 ±0.0010
This paper
126
Random
actual #126 vs paper #126
0.9540 ±0.0010
actual #126 vs paper #126
paper 0.9540 ±0.0010
paper 0.9540 ±0.0010 Δ at pub 0.0305
137
GIN
actual #137 vs paper #137
0.9530 ±0.0010
actual #137 vs paper #137
paper 0.9530 ±0.0010

Improvement within reported uncertainty; not highlighted.

paper 0.9530 ±0.0010 Δ at pub 0.0010
138
GraphConv
0.9530 ±0.0010
This paper
145
DARTS
0.9520 ±0.0010
This paper
175
GraphNAS
0.9450 ±0.0010
This paper

TU Dortmund

#ModelAccuracy ↑Paper
1
MSH-GNN
0.9910 ±0.0030
2
ID-GNN+BEC
0.9830 ±0.0360
3
SupCosine
0.9830 ±0.0250
39
GIN
actual #39 vs paper #408 369 places worse
0.9330 ±0.0290
best reported
actual #39 vs paper #408 369 places worse
paper 0.8630 ±0.0170
paper 0.8630 ±0.0170 Δ at pub 0.0700
63
GCN
actual #63 vs paper #652 589 places worse
0.9220 ±0.0440
best reported
actual #63 vs paper #652 589 places worse
paper 0.7860 ±0.0160
paper 0.7860 ±0.0160 Δ at pub 0.1050 Δ today 0.1360
158
GraphSAGE
actual #158 vs paper #656 498 places worse
0.9040 ±0.0780
best reported
actual #158 vs paper #656 498 places worse
paper 0.7830 ±0.0160

Difference within reported uncertainty; not counted as underperformance.

paper 0.7830 ±0.0160 Δ at pub 0.1210
183
GAT
actual #183 vs paper #661 478 places worse
0.9010 ±0.0580
best reported
actual #183 vs paper #661 478 places worse
paper 0.7800 ±0.0080
paper 0.7800 ±0.0080 Δ at pub 0.1210 Δ today 0.1210
297
DSGAS
0.8870 ±0.0070
This paper
380
GraphConv
0.8720 ±0.0140
This paper
403
MLP
actual #403 vs paper #719 316 places worse
0.8660 ±0.0495
best reported
actual #403 vs paper #719 316 places worse
paper 0.7480 ±0.0110
paper 0.7480 ±0.0110 Δ at pub 0.1180
405
DARTS
0.8650 ±0.0230
This paper
485
PAS
0.8400 ±0.0160
This paper
535
Random
actual #535 vs paper #563 28 places worse
0.8270 ±0.0680
best reported
actual #535 vs paper #563 28 places worse
paper 0.8210 ±0.0280

Difference within reported uncertainty; not counted as underperformance.

paper 0.8210 ±0.0280 Δ at pub 0.0060
674
GraphNAS
0.7750 ±0.0070
This paper
718
SAGE
0.7490 ±0.0870
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 at pub — reported value improved over the best known when published