TMLR 2024

Graph Pooling via Ricci Flow

Amy Feng Melanie Weber

Main figure for Graph Pooling via Ricci Flow

Abstract

Graph Machine Learning often involves the clustering of nodes based on similarity structure encoded in the graph's topology and the nodes' attributes. On homophilous graphs, the integration of pooling layers has been shown to enhance the performance of Graph Neural Networks by accounting for inherent multi-scale structure. Here, similar nodes are grouped together to coarsen the graph and reduce the input size in subsequent layers in deeper architectures. In both settings, the underlying clustering approach can be implemented via graph pooling operators, which often rely on classical tools from Graph Theory. In this work, we introduce a graph pooling operator (ORC-Pool), which utilizes a characterization of the graph's geometry via Ollivier's discrete Ricci curvature and an associated geometric flow. Previous Ricci flow based clustering approaches have shown great promise across several domains, but are by construction unable to account for similarity structure encoded in the node attributes. However, in many ML applications, such information is vital for downstream tasks. ORC-Pool extends such clustering approaches to attributed graphs, allowing for the integration of geometric coarsening into Graph Neural Networks as a pooling layer.

Benchmark Results

Tested on 9 datasets 2 baseline values reported too low Non-standard metric on 3 datasets

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

Classic

Cora

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

Sorted by NMI. Highlighted rows are from other papers.

#ModelNMI ↑Paper
1
ORC (us)
0.4700 ±0.0400
This paper
2
EMD
0.4700 ±0.0400
This paper
3
Sinkhorn
0.4500 ±0.0300
This paper
4
ORC-approx
0.4500 ±0.0300
This paper
5
MinCut
0.4300 ±0.0300
This paper
6
DMoN
0.3700 ±0.0500
This paper
7
Curv
0.3500
This paper
8
TV
0.3300 ±0.0500
This paper
9
Diff
0.2000 ±0.0400
This paper

CiteSeer

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

Sorted by NMI. Highlighted rows are from other papers.

#ModelNMI ↑Paper
1
ORC (us)
0.3500 ±0.0400
This paper
2
EMD
0.3500 ±0.0400
This paper
3
Sinkhorn
0.3500 ±0.0300
This paper
4
ORC-approx
0.3500 ±0.0300
This paper
5
Curv
0.3200
This paper
6
MinCut
0.3100 ±0.0400
This paper
7
TV
0.3000 ±0.0500
This paper
8
DMoN
0.2900 ±0.0300
This paper
9
Diff
0.2400 ±0.1200
This paper

TU Dortmund

#ModelAccuracy ↑Paper
1
MSH-GNN
0.9410 ±0.0330
2
GRDL
0.8260 ±0.0120
3
GMN
0.8225
28
ORC (us)
0.7900 ±0.0530
This paper
32
GIN
0.7880 ±0.0410
85
Curv
0.7700 ±0.0610
This paper
149
MLP
0.7600 ±0.0320
#ModelAccuracy ↑Paper
1
WL-MLP
0.9792
2
MSH-GNN
0.9640 ±0.0070
3
CoCN
0.8722 ±0.0013
23
GCN
0.8260 ±0.0220
84
DMoN
actual #84 vs paper #311 227 places worse
0.8090 ±0.0070
best reported
actual #84 vs paper #311 227 places worse
paper 0.6800 ±0.0200
paper 0.6800 ±0.0200 Δ at pub 0.1290
149
MinCut
actual #149 vs paper #314 165 places worse
0.7920 ±0.0150
best reported
actual #149 vs paper #314 165 places worse
paper 0.6700 ±0.0200
paper 0.6700 ±0.0200 Δ at pub 0.1220
151
MLP
0.7920 ±0.0240
292
ORC
0.7100 ±0.0200
This paper
301
Diff
0.7000 ±0.0200
This paper
302
TV
0.7000 ±0.0200
This paper
#ModelAccuracy ↑Paper
1
ID-GNN+BEC
0.8150 ±0.0240
2
GIN+BEC
0.8080 ±0.0330
3
GCN+BEC
0.7990 ±0.0340
4
GCN
0.7980 ±0.0230
129
ORC
0.7100 ±0.0490
This paper
130
Curv
0.7100 ±0.0510
This paper
145
MinCut
0.6500 ±0.0500
This paper
146
DMoN
0.6500 ±0.0400
This paper
150
Diff
0.6400 ±0.0600
This paper
155
TV
0.5400 ±0.0300
This paper
#ModelAccuracy ↑Paper
1
GIN-0
0.9240 ±0.0250
2
GIN-ε
0.9220 ±0.0230
3
DMoN
actual #3 vs paper #33 30 places worse
0.9100 ±0.0100
best reported
actual #3 vs paper #33 30 places worse
paper 0.8500 ±0.0200
paper 0.8500 ±0.0200 Δ today 0.0600
8
Diff
actual #8 vs paper #28 20 places worse
0.9000 ±0.0200
best reported
actual #8 vs paper #28 20 places worse
paper 0.8600 ±0.0200
paper 0.8600 ±0.0200 Δ today 0.0400
9
MinCut
actual #9 vs paper #33 24 places worse
0.9000 ±0.0200
best reported
actual #9 vs paper #33 24 places worse
paper 0.8500 ±0.0200
paper 0.8500 ±0.0200 Δ today 0.0500
20
ORC
0.8800 ±0.0200
This paper
34
TV
0.8500 ±0.0300
This paper
49
GCN
0.5653 ±0.0260

OGB

#ModelROC-AUC ↑Paper
1
Multi-RF Fusion with Multi-GNN Blending
0.8476 ±0.0002
2
HyperFusion
0.8475 ±0.0003
3
PAS+FPs
0.8420 ±0.0015
9
GatedGCN
0.8090 ±0.0160
109
GIN
0.7780 ±0.0182
275
ORC (us)
0.7300 ±0.0480
This paper
274
DMoN
0.7300 ±0.0370
This paper
289
MinCut
0.7000 ±0.0400
This paper
293
TV
0.6900 ±0.0340
This paper
297
Diff
0.6800 ±0.0520
This paper
#ModelAccuracy ↑Paper
1
GIANT-XRT
0.7612 ±0.0016
2
GEGCN
0.7576 ±0.0064
3
AGDN
0.7522 ±0.0007
23
GCN
0.7300 ±0.0017
42
ORC (us)
0.7200 ±0.0360
This paper
87
MinCut
0.7000 ±0.0270
This paper
94
DMoN
0.6800 ±0.0280
This paper
95
TV
0.6800 ±0.0400
This paper
103
Diff
0.6500 ±0.0310
This paper
107
MLP
0.5765 ±0.0012

LRGB

Peptides-func

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

Sorted by Accuracy. Highlighted rows are from other papers.

#ModelAccuracy ↑Paper
1
ORC
0.6900 ±0.0100
This paper
2
MinCut
0.6700 ±0.0200
This paper
3
DMoN
0.6700 ±0.0200
This paper
4
TV
0.6700 ±0.0200
This paper
5
Diff
0.6600 ±0.0200
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