Revisiting Edge Perturbation for Graph Neural Network in Graph Data Augmentation and Attack

Xin Liu, Yuxiang Zhang, Meng Wu, Mingyu Yan, Kun He, Wei Yan, Shirui Pan, Xiaochun Ye, Dongrui Fan

Main figure for Revisiting Edge Perturbation for Graph Neural Network in Graph Data Augmentation and Attack

Abstract

Edge perturbation is a basic method to modify graph structures. It can be categorized into two veins based on their effects on the performance of graph neural networks (GNNs), i.e., graph data augmentation and attack. Surprisingly, both veins of edge perturbation methods employ the same operations, yet yield opposite effects on GNNs' accuracy. A distinct boundary between these methods in using edge perturbation has never been clearly defined. Consequently, inappropriate perturbations may lead to undesirable outcomes, necessitating precise adjustments to achieve desired effects. Therefore, questions of ``why edge perturbation has a two-faced effect?'' and ``what makes edge perturbation flexible and effective?'' still remain unanswered. In this paper, we will answer these questions by proposing a unified formulation and establishing a clear boundary between two categories of edge perturbation methods. Specifically, we conduct experiments to elucidate the differences and similarities between these methods and theoretically unify the workflow of these methods by casting it to one optimization problem. Then, we devise Edge Priority Detector (EPD) to generate a novel priority metric, bridging these methods up in the workflow. Experiments show that EPD can make augmentation or attack flexibly and achieve comparable or superior performance to other counterparts with less time overhead.

Benchmark Results

Tested on 3 datasets

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
0.9004
140
Vanilla
actual #140 vs paper #140
0.8710
actual #140 vs paper #140
paper 0.8710
paper 0.8710 Δ at pub 0.0487
724
MLP
0.7768
#ModelAccuracy ↑Paper
1
CNA
0.9575 ±0.0058
2
IS-GIB
0.9390 ±0.0187
3
EERM
0.9112 ±0.0145
44
GCN
0.8033 ±0.0088
169
Vanilla
actual #169 vs paper #169
0.7530
actual #169 vs paper #169
paper 0.7530
paper 0.7530 Δ at pub 0.0366
350
MLP
0.7289 ±0.0010
SOTA performance (not significantly different from the best) Baseline / comparison (this paper) Global context (other papers) Best at pub — reported value improved over the best known when published