ICML 2024

SlotGAT: Slot-based Message Passing for Heterogeneous Graphs

Ziang Zhou, Jieming Shi, Renchi Yang, Yuanhang Zou, Qing Li

Main figure for SlotGAT: Slot-based Message Passing for Heterogeneous Graphs

Abstract

Heterogeneous graphs are ubiquitous to model complex data. There are urgent needs on powerful heterogeneous graph neural networks to effectively support important applications. We identify a potential semantic mixing issue in existing message passing processes, where the representations of the neighbors of a node $v$ are forced to be transformed to the feature space of $v$ for aggregation, though the neighbors are in different types. That is, the semantics in different node types are entangled together into node $v$'s representation. To address the issue, we propose SlotGAT with separate message passing processes in slots, one for each node type, to maintain the representations in their own node-type feature spaces. Moreover, in a slot-based message passing layer, we design an attention mechanism for effective slot-wise message aggregation. Further, we develop a slot attention technique after the last layer of SlotGAT, to learn the importance of different slots in downstream tasks. Our analysis indicates that the slots in SlotGAT can preserve different semantics in various feature spaces. The superiority of SlotGAT is evaluated against 13 baselines on 6 datasets for node classification and link prediction. Our code is at https://github.com/scottjiao/SlotGAT_ICML23/.

Proposed method: SlotGAT

Benchmark Results

Tested on 4 datasets 18 baseline values reported too low

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

Heterogeneous Graph Benchmarks

DBLP

Global leaderboard →

Default metric is Micro-F1. The paper reports 14 values on Micro-F1 and 14 values on Macro-F1 .

#ModelMicro-F1 ↑ defaultMacro-F1 ↑Paper
1
LMSPS
0.9566 ± 0.0020
—
2
PSHGCN
0.9561 ± 0.0012
—
3
RpHGNN
0.9555 ± 0.0029
—
6
SlotGAT
0.9531 ± 0.0019
0.9495 ± 0.0020
Macro-F1 0.9495 ± 0.0020
This paper
19
space4HGNN
0.9463 ± 0.0040
0.9424 ± 0.0042
Macro-F1 0.9424 ± 0.0042
This paper
21
GCN
0.9460 ±0.0031
best reported
0.9084 ± 0.0032
Macro-F1 0.9084 ± 0.0032
paper 0.9147 ±0.0034
paper 0.9147 ±0.0034 Δ at pub 0.0313
22
MAGNN
0.9456
best reported
0.9328 ± 0.0051
Macro-F1 0.9328 ± 0.0051
paper 0.9376 ±0.0045
paper 0.9376 ±0.0045 Δ at pub 0.0080
23
GAT
0.9448 ±0.0022
best reported
0.9383 ± 0.0027
Macro-F1 0.9383 ± 0.0027
paper 0.9339 ±0.0030
paper 0.9339 ±0.0030 Δ at pub 0.0109
26
simpleHGN
0.9446 ± 0.0020
0.9401 ± 0.0027
Macro-F1 0.9401 ± 0.0027
This paper
31
DisenHAN
0.9418 ± 0.0036
0.9366 ± 0.0039
Macro-F1 0.9366 ± 0.0039
This paper
32
GTN
0.9417 ±0.0026
best reported
0.9352 ± 0.0055
Macro-F1 0.9352 ± 0.0055
paper 0.9397 ±0.0054

Difference within reported uncertainty; not counted as underperformance.

paper 0.9397 ±0.0054 Δ at pub 0.0020
35
RSHN
0.9381 ± 0.0055
0.9334 ± 0.0058
Macro-F1 0.9334 ± 0.0058
This paper
37
HAN
0.9369
best reported
0.9167 ± 0.0049
Macro-F1 0.9167 ± 0.0049
paper 0.9205 ±0.0062
39
HGT
0.9365
best reported
0.9301 ± 0.0023
Macro-F1 0.9301 ± 0.0023
paper 0.9349 ±0.0025

Difference within reported uncertainty; not counted as underperformance.

paper 0.9349 ±0.0025 Δ at pub 0.0016
43
HetGNN
0.9336
best reported
0.9176 ± 0.0043
Macro-F1 0.9176 ± 0.0043
paper 0.9233 ±0.0041
paper 0.9233 ±0.0041 Δ at pub 0.0103
46
GraphSAGE
0.9306 ± 0.0047
—
66
RGCN
0.9207 ± 0.0050
0.9152 ± 0.0050
Macro-F1 0.9152 ± 0.0050
This paper
132
HetSANN
0.8056 ± 0.0150
0.7855 ± 0.0242
Macro-F1 0.7855 ± 0.0242
This paper
176
MLP
0.6447 ± 0.0136
—
#ModelMicro-F1 ↑Paper
1
LMSPS
0.9469 ±0.0036
2
PSHGCN
0.9427 ±0.0023
3
SlotGAT
0.9406 ±0.0022
This paper
13
simpleHGN
0.9335 ±0.0045
This paper
19
GAT
actual #19 vs paper #31 12 places worse
0.9273
best reported
actual #19 vs paper #31 12 places worse
paper 0.9219 ±0.0093

Difference within reported uncertainty; not counted as underperformance.

paper 0.9219 ±0.0093 Δ at pub 0.0054
22
GTN
actual #22 vs paper #46 24 places worse
0.9258
best reported
actual #22 vs paper #46 24 places worse
paper 0.9120 ±0.0071
paper 0.9120 ±0.0071 Δ at pub 0.0138
24
DisenHAN
0.9245 ±0.0033
This paper
25
space4HGNN
0.9238 ±0.0010
This paper
29
GCN
actual #29 vs paper #33 4 places worse
0.9229
best reported
actual #29 vs paper #33 4 places worse
paper 0.9212 ±0.0023

Difference within reported uncertainty; not counted as underperformance.

paper 0.9212 ±0.0023 Δ at pub 0.0017
41
HGT
actual #41 vs paper #48 7 places worse
0.9160 ±0.0060
best reported
actual #41 vs paper #48 7 places worse
paper 0.9100 ±0.0076
best at pub: Heterogeneous Graph Benchmarks (KDD 2021)

Difference within reported uncertainty; not counted as underperformance.

paper 0.9100 ±0.0076 Δ today 0.0060
43
HAN
actual #43 vs paper #50 7 places worse
0.9147 ±0.0022
best reported
actual #43 vs paper #50 7 places worse
paper 0.9079 ±0.0043
best at pub: Heterogeneous Graph Benchmarks (KDD 2021)
paper 0.9079 ±0.0043 Δ today 0.0068
44
RGCN
0.9141 ±0.0074
This paper
49
GIN
0.9092
51
MAGNN
0.9077 ±0.0065
This paper
60
RSHN
0.9032 ±0.0154
This paper
63
HetSANN
0.8991 ±0.0037
This paper
92
HetGNN
0.8605 ±0.0025
This paper
109
MLP
0.7102 ±0.0221
#ModelMicro-F1 ↑Paper
1
ELLA
0.7930 ±0.0010
2
MHGCN
0.7820 ±0.0138
3
PSHGCN
0.7446 ±0.0032
6
simpleHGN
actual #6 vs paper #20 14 places worse
0.7083 ±0.0107
best reported
actual #6 vs paper #20 14 places worse
paper 0.6736 ±0.0057
paper 0.6736 ±0.0057 Δ at pub 0.0347
11
SlotGAT
actual #11 vs paper #11
0.6864 ±0.0033
best reported
actual #11 vs paper #11
paper 0.6854 ±0.0033

Difference within reported uncertainty; not counted as underperformance.

paper 0.6854 ±0.0033 Δ at pub 0.0010
13
GTN
actual #13 vs paper #31 18 places worse
0.6827 ±0.0065
best reported
actual #13 vs paper #31 18 places worse
paper 0.6514 ±0.0045
paper 0.6514 ±0.0045 Δ at pub 0.0313
14
GCN
actual #14 vs paper #32 18 places worse
0.6813 ±0.0083
best reported
actual #14 vs paper #32 18 places worse
paper 0.6482 ±0.0064
paper 0.6482 ±0.0064 Δ at pub 0.0331
15
GAT
actual #15 vs paper #32 17 places worse
0.6808 ±0.0049
best reported
actual #15 vs paper #32 17 places worse
paper 0.6486 ±0.0043
paper 0.6486 ±0.0043 Δ at pub 0.0322
17
MAGNN
actual #17 vs paper #34 17 places worse
0.6782 ±0.0154
best reported
actual #17 vs paper #34 17 places worse
paper 0.6467 ±0.0167
paper 0.6467 ±0.0167 Δ at pub 0.0315
18
HAN
actual #18 vs paper #34 16 places worse
0.6769 ±0.0064
best reported
actual #18 vs paper #34 16 places worse
paper 0.6463 ±0.0058
paper 0.6463 ±0.0058 Δ at pub 0.0306
20
DisenHAN
0.6748 ±0.0045
This paper
24
HGT
0.6720 ±0.0057
This paper
26
RGCN
actual #26 vs paper #47 21 places worse
0.6651 ±0.0028
best reported
actual #26 vs paper #47 21 places worse
paper 0.6205 ±0.0015
paper 0.6205 ±0.0015 Δ at pub 0.0446
35
RSHN
0.6422 ±0.0103
This paper
39
space4HGNN
0.6396 ±0.0043
This paper
44
GraphSAGE
0.6276
53
HetSANN
actual #53 vs paper #63 10 places worse
0.6069
best reported
actual #53 vs paper #63 10 places worse
paper 0.5768 ±0.0044
paper 0.5768 ±0.0044 Δ at pub 0.0301
74
MLP
0.5514
83
HetGNN
0.5116 ±0.0065
This paper
#ModelMacro-F1 ↑Paper
1
ConCH
0.6475
2
HetGNN
0.6292
3
GC-HGNN
0.6247 ±0.0042
5
HGT
actual #5 vs paper #38 33 places worse
0.6176
best reported
actual #5 vs paper #38 33 places worse
paper 0.2928 ±0.0252
paper 0.2928 ±0.0252 Δ at pub 0.3248
7
GCN
actual #7 vs paper #39 32 places worse
0.6090
best reported
actual #7 vs paper #39 32 places worse
paper 0.2784 ±0.0313
paper 0.2784 ±0.0313 Δ at pub 0.3306
10
HAN
actual #10 vs paper #42 32 places worse
0.6011
best reported
actual #10 vs paper #42 32 places worse
paper 0.2131 ±0.0168
paper 0.2131 ±0.0168 Δ at pub 0.3880
25
GAT
actual #25 vs paper #36 11 places worse
0.5109
best reported
actual #25 vs paper #36 11 places worse
paper 0.4074 ±0.0258
paper 0.4074 ±0.0258 Δ at pub 0.1035
27
SlotGAT
0.4968 ±0.0197
This paper
30
simpleHGN
0.4772 ±0.0148
This paper
32
RGCN
0.4678 ±0.0077
This paper
34
GraphSAGE
0.4417 ±0.0114
35
space4HGNN
0.4137 ±0.0449
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