ADEdgeDrop: Adversarial Edge Dropping for Robust Graph Neural Networks
Abstract
Although Graph Neural Networks (GNNs) have exhibited the powerful ability to gather graph-structured information from neighborhood nodes via various message-passing mechanisms, the performance of GNNs is limited by poor generalization and fragile robustness caused by noisy and redundant graph data. As a prominent solution, Graph Augmentation Learning (GAL) has recently received increasing attention in the literature. Among the existing GAL approaches, edge-dropping methods that randomly remove edges from a graph during training are effective techniques to improve the robustness of GNNs. However, randomly dropping edges often results in bypassing critical edges. Consequently, the effectiveness of message passing is weakened. In this paper, we propose a novel adversarial edge-dropping method (ADEdgeDrop) that leverages an adversarial edge predictor guiding the removal of edges, which can be flexibly incorporated into diverse GNN backbones. Employing an adversarial training framework, the edge predictor utilizes the line graph transformed from the original graph to estimate the edges to be dropped, which improves the interpretability of the edge-dropping method. The proposed ADEdgeDrop is optimized alternately by stochastic gradient descent and projected gradient descent. Comprehensive experiments on eight graph benchmark datasets demonstrate that the proposed ADEdgeDrop outperforms state-of-the-art baselines across various GNN backbones, demonstrating improved generalization and robustness.
Benchmark Results
Tested on 3 datasets Non-standard metric on 1 dataset
Tables show presented results in global context (best 3 papers + GCN + MLP).
Classic
| # | Model | Accuracy ↑ | Paper |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | LGTL | 0.9518
±0.0011 | |
| 2 | MixHop (LO) | 0.9513
±0.0038 | |
| 3 | GraphSAGE (LO) | 0.9511
±0.0036 | |
| 18 | GCN | 0.9296
±0.0015 | |
| 210 | MLP | 0.8690
±0.0074 | |
| 632 | GCN ADEdgeDrop | 0.7852
±0.0016 | This paper |
| 637 | GCN DropEdge | 0.7850
±0.0430 best reported | best at pub: Learning to Drop: Robust Graph Neural Network via Topological Denoising (2020) Difference within reported uncertainty; not counted as underperformance. |
| 644 | GCN DropMessage | 0.7849
±0.0032 | This paper |
| 667 | GraphSAGE ADEdgeDrop | 0.7812
±0.0065 | This paper |
| 672 | GraphSAGE DropMessage | 0.7808
±0.0039 | This paper |
| 711 | GraphSAGE DropEdge++ | 0.7752
±0.0044 | This paper |
| 722 | GraphSage Original | 0.7730
±0.0081 | This paper |
| 730 | GCN Original | 0.7714
±0.0044 | This paper |
| 731 | GAT DropMessage | 0.7714
±0.0046 | This paper |
| 743 | GCN DropNode | 0.7692
±0.0050 | This paper |
| 744 | GAT ADEdgeDrop | 0.7686
±0.0103 | This paper |
| 749 | GAT DropEdge++ | 0.7672
±0.0076 | This paper |
| 762 | GAT FLAG | 0.7630
±0.0046 | This paper |
| 763 | GraphSAGE DropNode | 0.7628
±0.0176 | This paper |
| 765 | GAT DropNode | 0.7618
±0.0035 | This paper |
| 774 | GAT Original | 0.7594
±0.0118 | This paper |
| 798 | GCN FLAG | 0.7508
±0.0068 | This paper |
| 810 | GraphSAGE FLAG | 0.7404
±0.0129 | This paper |
Heterophilic Graphs
| # | Model | Accuracy ↑ | Paper |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | DiGGR | 0.4535
±0.0353 | |
| 2 | TRIGON | 0.4402
±0.0028 | |
| 3 | DoG | 0.4320
±0.0120 | |
| 42 | MLP | 0.4026
±0.0108 | |
| 68 | GraphSAGE | 0.3899
±0.0085 | |
| 423 | GAT ADEdgeDrop | 0.2560
±0.0137 | This paper |
| 435 | GraphSAGE ADEdgeDrop | 0.2506
±0.0225 | This paper |
| 444 | GCN DropEdge | 0.2384
±0.0122 | This paper |
| 446 | GAT DropMessage | 0.2378
±0.0154 | This paper |
| 447 | GraphSAGE GAUG-O | 0.2376
±0.0104 | This paper |
| 449 | GAT DropEdge++ | 0.2369
±0.0123 | This paper |
| 451 | GraphSAGE DropEdge++ | 0.2349
±0.0211 | This paper |
| 454 | GAT GAUG-O | 0.2305
±0.0134 | This paper |
| 455 | GCN ADEdgeDrop | 0.2304
±0.0252 | This paper |
| 456 | GraphSage Original | 0.2304
±0.0163 | This paper |
| 458 | GAT Original | 0.2294
±0.0163 | This paper |
| 459 | GCN GAUG-O | 0.2290
±0.0044 | This paper |
| 464 | GAT DropNode | 0.2240
±0.0187 | This paper |
| 467 | GraphSAGE FLAG | 0.2222
±0.0098 | This paper |
| 469 | GCN DropNode | 0.2218
±0.0091 | This paper |
| 471 | GCN DropMessage | 0.2194
±0.0095 | This paper |
| 472 | GraphSAGE DropNode | 0.2186
±0.0045 | This paper |
| 473 | GAT FLAG | 0.2180
±0.0072 | This paper |
| 474 | GraphSAGE DropMessage | 0.2176
±0.0237 | This paper |
| 477 | GCN FLAG | 0.2142
±0.0052 | This paper |
| 482 | GCN Original | 0.2076
±0.0188 | This paper |
Heterogeneous Graph Benchmarks
ACM
Global leaderboard →Sorted by Accuracy. Highlighted rows are from other papers.
| # | Model | Accuracy ↑ | Paper |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | SignGT | 0.9545
±0.0049 | |
| 2 | NodeFormer | 0.9493
±0.0035 | |
| 3 | FAGCN | 0.9487
±0.0059 | |
| 34 | GCN | 0.9233
±0.0038 | |
| 52 | ADEdgeDrop | 0.8926
±0.0008 | This paper |
| 53 | DropEdge | 0.8894
±0.0051 | This paper |
| 54 | GAuG-O | 0.8880
±0.0109 | This paper |
| 56 | FLAG | 0.8828
±0.0035 | This paper |
| 58 | Original | 0.8784
±0.0019 | This paper |
| 59 | DropNode | 0.8762
±0.0043 | This paper |
| 60 | DropMessage | 0.8762
±0.0213 | This paper |
