ICLR 2024

Distinguished In Uniform: Self Attention Vs. Virtual Nodes

Eran Rosenbluth, Jan Tonshoff, Martin Ritzert, Berke Kisin, Martin Grohe

Main figure for Distinguished In Uniform: Self Attention Vs. Virtual Nodes

Abstract

Graph Transformers (GTs) such as SAN and GPS are graph processing models that combine Message-Passing GNNs (MPGNNs) with global Self-Attention. They were shown to be universal function approximators, with two reservations: 1. The initial node features must be augmented with certain positional encodings. 2. The approximation is non-uniform: Graphs of different sizes may require a different approximating network. We first clarify that this form of universality is not unique to GTs: Using the same positional encodings, also pure MPGNNs and even 2-layer MLPs are non-uniform universal approximators. We then consider uniform expressivity: The target function is to be approximated by a single network for graphs of all sizes. There, we compare GTs to the more efficient MPGNN + Virtual Node architecture. The essential difference between the two model definitions is in their global computation method -- Self-Attention Vs Virtual Node. We prove that none of the models is a uniform-universal approximator, before proving our main result: Neither model's uniform expressivity subsumes the other's. We demonstrate the theory with experiments on synthetic data. We further augment our study with real-world datasets, observing mixed results which indicate no clear ranking in practice as well.

Benchmark Results

Tested on 4 datasets

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
54
GatedGCN-VN
0.2475 ±0.0018
This paper
92
GCN-VN
0.2505 ±0.0022
This paper
201
MLP
0.4351 ±0.0008
#ModelAP ↑Paper
1
S^2GCN
0.7311 ±0.0066
2
S4G
0.7293 ±0.0004
3
BuNN
0.7276 ±0.0065
4
GCN
0.7261 ±0.0011
54
GatedGCN-VN
0.6823 ±0.0069
This paper
64
GCN-VN
0.6732 ±0.0066
This paper
112
SAN
0.6439 ±0.0075
This paper
181
MLP
0.4060 ±0.0021
#ModelF1 ↑Paper
1
NeuralWalker
0.4912 ±0.0042
2
PPGT
0.4641 ±0.0033
3
CRaWl
0.4588 ±0.0079
12
GatedGCN-VN
0.4477 ±0.0137
This paper
41
GatedGCN
0.3880 ±0.0040
70
GCN-VN
0.2950 ±0.0058
This paper
81
GCN
0.2380 ±0.0160
93
MLP
0.1140 ±0.0230
#ModelF1 ↑Paper
1
FloydNet
0.4901
2
CRaWl
0.4588 ±0.0079
3
GPS
0.4440 ±0.0065
16
GatedGCN
0.3880 ±0.0040
32
GatedGCN-VN
0.3244 ±0.0025
This paper
45
GCN
0.2078 ±0.0031
46
GCN-VN
0.2072 ±0.0043
This paper
74
MLP
0.0310 ±0.0160
SOTA performance (not significantly different from the best) Baseline / comparison (this paper) Global context (other papers)