ICML 2024

Rethinking Independent Cross-Entropy Loss For Graph-Structured Data

Rui Miao, Kaixiong Zhou, Yili Wang, Ninghao Liu, Ying Wang, Xin Wang

Main figure for Rethinking Independent Cross-Entropy Loss For Graph-Structured Data

Abstract

Graph neural networks (GNNs) have exhibited prominent performance in learning graph-structured data. Considering node classification task, based on the i.i.d assumption among node labels, the traditional supervised learning simply sums up cross-entropy losses of the independent training nodes and applies the average loss to optimize GNNs' weights. But different from other data formats, the nodes are naturally connected. It is found that the independent distribution modeling of node labels restricts GNNs' capability to generalize over the entire graph and defend adversarial attacks. In this work, we propose a new framework, termed joint-cluster supervised learning, to model the joint distribution of each node with its corresponding cluster. We learn the joint distribution of node and cluster labels conditioned on their representations, and train GNNs with the obtained joint loss. In this way, the data-label reference signals extracted from the local cluster explicitly strengthen the discrimination ability on the target node. The extensive experiments demonstrate that our joint-cluster supervised learning can effectively bolster GNNs' node classification accuracy. Furthermore, being benefited from the reference signals which may be free from spiteful interference, our learning paradigm significantly protects the node classification from being affected by the adversarial attack.

Benchmark Results

Tested on 3 datasets Non-standard metric on 2 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
313
SGC (JC)
0.8387 ±0.0079
This paper
324
GAT (JC)
0.8377 ±0.0044
This paper
364
GCN (JC)
0.8351 ±0.0035
This paper
618
SAGE (JC)
0.8081 ±0.0063
This paper
724
MLP
0.7768
845
MLP (JC)
0.6719 ±0.0062
This paper

Heterogeneous Graph Benchmarks

DBLP

Global leaderboard →
Non-default metric. This paper reports Accuracy; the dataset default is Micro-F1. Values below use Accuracy only.

Sorted by Accuracy. Highlighted rows are from other papers.

#ModelAccuracy ↑Paper
1
HG-SCM
0.9490 ±0.0015
2
SeHGNN
0.9489 ±0.0018
3
AdvSynGNN
0.9486 ±0.0012
36
GCN
0.8758 ±0.0020
65
MLP
0.8118 ±0.0020
84
GAT (JC)
0.7692 ±0.0159
This paper
101
GCN (JC)
0.7510 ±0.0163
This paper
103
SGC (JC)
0.7487 ±0.0181
This paper
107
MLP+CE+C&S
0.7323 ±0.0086
This paper
111
SAGE (JC)
0.7187 ±0.0207
This paper
121
MLP+JC
0.6116 ±0.0363
This paper
122
MLP (JC)
0.6116 ±0.0363
This paper
129
MLP+CE
0.4795 ±0.0397
This paper

Other Graph Benchmarks

Amazon2M

Global leaderboard →
Non-default metric. This paper reports micro-F1; the dataset default is Accuracy. Values below use micro-F1 only.

Sorted by micro-F1. Highlighted rows are from other papers.

#Modelmicro-F1 ↑Paper
1
SIGN
0.8022 ±0.0004
This paper
2
Cluster-GCN
0.7663 ±0.0027
This paper
3
GraphSAGE
0.7614 ±0.0029
This paper
SOTA performance (not significantly different from the best) Baseline / comparison (this paper) Global context (other papers)