WWW 2024

Leveraging Invariant Principle for Heterophilic Graph Structure Distribution Shifts

Jinluan Yang, Zhengyu Chen, Teng Xiao, Yong Lin, Wenqiao Zhang, Kun Kuang

Main figure for Leveraging Invariant Principle for Heterophilic Graph Structure Distribution Shifts

Abstract

Heterophilic Graph Neural Networks (HGNNs) have shown promising results for semi-supervised learning tasks on graphs. Notably, most real-world heterophilic graphs are composed of a mixture of nodes with different neighbor patterns, exhibiting local node-level homophilic and heterophilic structures. However, existing works are only devoted to designing better unified HGNN backbones for node classification tasks on heterophilic and homophilic graphs simultaneously, and their analyses of HGNN performance concerning nodes are only based on the determined data distribution without exploring the effect caused by the difference of structural pattern between training and testing nodes. How to learn invariant node representations on heterophilic graphs to handle this structure difference or distribution shifts remains unexplored. In this paper, we first discuss the limitations of previous graph-based invariant learning methods in addressing the heterophilic graph structure distribution shifts from the perspective of data augmentation. Then, we propose HEI, a framework capable of generating invariant node representations through incorporating Heterophily information, the node's estimated neighbor pattern, to infer latent Environments without augmentation, which are then used for Invariant prediction. We provide detailed theoretical guarantees to clarify the reasonability of HEI. Extensive experiments on various benchmarks and backbones can also demonstrate the effectiveness and robustness of our method compared with existing state-of-the-art baselines.

Proposed method: HEI

Benchmark Results

Tested on 1 dataset

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

Heterophilic Graphs

#ModelAccuracy ↑Paper
1
DiGGR
0.4535 ±0.0353
2
TRIGON
0.4402 ±0.0028
3
DoG
0.4320 ±0.0120
12
HEI
0.4225 ±0.0159
This paper
25
CaNet
0.4158 ±0.0132
This paper
26
IENE
0.4158 ±0.0137
This paper
27
FLOOD
0.4154 ±0.0134
This paper
32
BAGNN
0.4126 ±0.0152
This paper
36
ERM
0.4096 ±0.0152
This paper
42
MLP
0.4026 ±0.0108
60
EERM
actual #60 vs paper #60
0.3934 ±0.0321
actual #60 vs paper #60
paper 0.3934 ±0.0321
paper 0.3934 ±0.0321 Δ at pub 0.1169
68
GraphSAGE
0.3899 ±0.0085
206
SRGNN
0.3562 ±0.0275
This paper
214
StruRW-Mixup
0.3545 ±0.0279
This paper
215
ReNode
0.3542 ±0.0275
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 value improved over the best known when published