ICLR 2024

When Graph Neural Networks Meet Dynamic Mode Decomposition

Dai Shi, Lequan Lin, Andi Han, Zhiyong Wang, Yi Guo, Junbin Gao

Main figure for When Graph Neural Networks Meet Dynamic Mode Decomposition

Abstract

Graph Neural Networks (GNNs) have emerged as fundamental tools for a wide range of prediction tasks on graph-structured data. Recent studies have drawn analogies between GNN feature propagation and diffusion processes, which can be interpreted as dynamical systems. In this paper, we delve deeper into this perspective by connecting the dynamics in GNNs to modern Koopman theory and its numerical method, Dynamic Mode Decomposition (DMD). We illustrate how DMD can estimate a low-rank, finite-dimensional linear operator based on multiple states of the system, effectively approximating potential nonlinear interactions between nodes in the graph. This approach allows us to capture complex dynamics within the graph accurately and efficiently. We theoretically establish a connection between the DMD-estimated operator and the original dynamic operator between system states. Building upon this foundation, we introduce a family of DMD-GNN models that effectively leverage the low-rank eigenfunctions provided by the DMD algorithm. We further discuss the potential of enhancing our approach by incorporating domain-specific constraints such as symmetry into the DMD computation, allowing the corresponding GNN models to respect known physical properties of the underlying system. Our work paves the path for applying advanced dynamical system analysis tools via GNNs. We validate our approach through extensive experiments on various learning tasks, including directed graphs, large-scale graphs, long-range interactions, and spatial-temporal graphs. We also empirically verify that our proposed models can serve as powerful encoders for link prediction tasks. The results demonstrate that our DMD-enhanced GNNs achieve state-of-the-art performance, highlighting the effectiveness of integrating DMD into GNN frameworks.

Proposed method: DMD++

Benchmark Results

Tested on 8 datasets 9 baseline values reported too low

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
actual #21 vs paper #573 552 places worse
0.9004
best reported
actual #21 vs paper #573 552 places worse
paper 0.8150 ±0.0050
paper 0.8150 ±0.0050 Δ at pub 0.0854
39
SAGE
actual #39 vs paper #779 740 places worse
0.8911 ±0.0012
best reported
actual #39 vs paper #779 740 places worse
paper 0.7450 ±0.0080
141
GraphSAGE
0.8708 ±0.0085
298
DMD-SGC
0.8410 ±0.0040
This paper
398
Framelets
0.8330 ±0.0050
This paper
437
DMD-ACMP
0.8290 ±0.0090
This paper
464
DMD-GCN
0.8260 ±0.0070
This paper
497
DMD++
0.8230 ±0.0030
This paper
724
MLP
actual #724 vs paper #890 166 places worse
0.7768
best reported
actual #724 vs paper #890 166 places worse
paper 0.5510 ±0.0130
paper 0.5510 ±0.0130 Δ at pub 0.2258
#ModelAccuracy ↑Paper
1
CNA
0.9575 ±0.0058
2
IS-GIB
0.9390 ±0.0187
3
EERM
0.9112 ±0.0145
44
GCN
0.8033 ±0.0088
259
SAGE
actual #259 vs paper #713 454 places worse
0.7361 ±0.0190
best reported
actual #259 vs paper #713 454 places worse
paper 0.6720 ±0.0100
paper 0.6720 ±0.0100 Δ at pub 0.0641
310
DMD++
0.7320 ±0.0040
This paper
333
DMD-ACMP
0.7300 ±0.0210
This paper
350
MLP
0.7289 ±0.0010
382
DMD-SGC
0.7260 ±0.0080
This paper
523
DMD-GCN
0.7140 ±0.0260
This paper
561
Framelets
0.7100 ±0.0060
This paper
#ModelAccuracy ↑Paper
1
LGTL
0.9518 ±0.0011
2
MixHop (LO)
0.9513 ±0.0038
3
GraphSAGE (LO)
0.9511 ±0.0036
18
GCN
actual #18 vs paper #585 567 places worse
0.9296 ±0.0015
best reported
actual #18 vs paper #585 567 places worse
paper 0.7900 ±0.0030
116
SAGE
actual #116 vs paper #745 629 places worse
0.8881 ±0.0015
best reported
actual #116 vs paper #745 629 places worse
paper 0.7680 ±0.0060
paper 0.7680 ±0.0060 Δ at pub 0.0102 Δ today 0.1201
125
GraphSAGE
0.8864 ±0.0030
210
MLP
actual #210 vs paper #827 617 places worse
0.8690 ±0.0074
best reported
actual #210 vs paper #827 617 places worse
paper 0.7140 ±0.0040
paper 0.7140 ±0.0040 Δ at pub 0.1550
363
DMD-ACMP
0.8120 ±0.0150
This paper
468
DMD++
0.7990 ±0.0070
This paper
538
Framelets
0.7940 ±0.0040
This paper
539
DMD-SGC
0.7940 ±0.0140
This paper
551
DMD-GCN
0.7930 ±0.0090
This paper

Heterophilic Graphs

#ModelAccuracy ↑Paper
1
P^2GNN
0.9672 ±0.0147
2
DoG
0.9660 ±0.0210
3
GPF-plus
0.9583 ±0.0419
28
GPRGNN
actual #28 vs paper #302 274 places worse
0.9295 ±0.0131
best reported
actual #28 vs paper #302 274 places worse
paper 0.7590 ±0.0620
paper 0.7590 ±0.0620 Δ at pub 0.1702 Δ today 0.1705
31
DMD++
0.9260 ±0.0340
This paper
34
MLP
0.9230 ±0.0070
40
H2GCN
actual #40 vs paper #126 86 places worse
0.9189 ±0.0393
best reported
actual #40 vs paper #126 86 places worse
paper 0.8590 ±0.0460

Difference within reported uncertainty; not counted as underperformance.

paper 0.8590 ±0.0460 Δ at pub 0.0175 Δ today 0.0599
53
GraphSAGE
0.9000 ±0.0365
66
DMD-ACMP
0.8940 ±0.0380
This paper
165
DMD-GCN
0.8420 ±0.0260
This paper
189
SAGE
actual #189 vs paper #257 68 places worse
0.7930 ±0.0120
199
Framelets
0.8230 ±0.0250
This paper
217
GRAND
actual #217 vs paper #217
0.8140 ±0.0350
actual #217 vs paper #217
paper 0.8140 ±0.0350

Improvement within reported uncertainty; not highlighted.

paper 0.8140 ±0.0350 Δ at pub 0.0120
223
DMD-SGC
0.8120 ±0.0250
This paper
#ModelAccuracy ↑Paper
1
P^2GNN
0.9541 ±0.0272
2
ACM-GCN
0.9480 ±0.0380
3
RF-GCN
0.9429
21
APPNP
actual #21 vs paper #27 6 places worse
0.9181 ±0.0196
best reported
actual #21 vs paper #27 6 places worse
paper 0.8980 ±0.0060

Difference within reported uncertainty; not counted as underperformance.

paper 0.8980 ±0.0060 Δ at pub 0.0201
23
DMD++
0.9140 ±0.0170
This paper
24
MLP
0.9136 ±0.0070
42
DMD-ACMP
0.8810 ±0.0240
This paper
68
H2GCN
actual #68 vs paper #91 23 places worse
0.8623 ±0.0471
best reported
actual #68 vs paper #91 23 places worse
paper 0.8510 ±0.0640

Difference within reported uncertainty; not counted as underperformance.

paper 0.8510 ±0.0640 Δ today 0.0113
119
DMD-GCN
0.8360 ±0.0310
This paper
138
SAGE
actual #138 vs paper #272 134 places worse
0.7140 ±0.0120
142
GRAND
actual #142 vs paper #224 82 places worse
0.8246 ±0.0709
best reported
actual #142 vs paper #224 82 places worse
paper 0.7560 ±0.0320

Difference within reported uncertainty; not counted as underperformance.

paper 0.7560 ±0.0320 Δ at pub 0.0660 Δ today 0.0686
157
GraphSAGE
0.8196 ±0.0739
181
DMD-SGC
0.8000 ±0.0190
This paper
263
Framelets
0.7260 ±0.0030
This paper
#ModelAccuracy ↑Paper
1
DMD++
0.9190 ±0.0260
This paper
2
F-GREAD-BS
0.9059 ±0.0380
3
APPNP
actual #3 vs paper #3
0.9010 ±0.0350
actual #3 vs paper #3
paper 0.9010 ±0.0350
paper 0.9010 ±0.0350 Δ at pub 0.0580
5
GPRGNN
actual #5 vs paper #5
0.8990 ±0.0300
actual #5 vs paper #5
paper 0.8990 ±0.0300

Improvement within reported uncertainty; not highlighted.

paper 0.8990 ±0.0300 Δ at pub 0.0440
10
DMD-ACMP
0.8940 ±0.0220
This paper
12
Framelets
0.8890 ±0.0320
This paper
13
GRAND
actual #13 vs paper #13
0.8860 ±0.0210
actual #13 vs paper #13
paper 0.8860 ±0.0210
paper 0.8860 ±0.0210 Δ at pub 0.0919
22
H2GCN
actual #22 vs paper #22
0.8790 ±0.0420
actual #22 vs paper #22
paper 0.8790 ±0.0420

Improvement within reported uncertainty; not highlighted.

paper 0.8790 ±0.0420 Δ at pub 0.0025
37
MLP
0.8629 ±0.0450
44
DMD-GCN
0.8520 ±0.0210
This paper
63
GCN
0.8310 ±0.0320
64
DMD-SGC
0.8300 ±0.0180
This paper
149
SAGE
0.6480 ±0.0520
This paper

LRGB

PascalVOC-SP

Global leaderboard →

Default metric is F1. The paper reports 4 values on F1 and 3 values on F1-macro .

#ModelF1 ↑ defaultF1-macro ↑Paper
1
NeuralWalker
0.4912 ± 0.0042
—
2
PPGT
0.4641 ± 0.0033
—
3
CRaWl
0.4588 ± 0.0079
—
41
GatedGCN
0.3880 ± 0.0040
—
80
DMD-GCN
—
0.2430 ± 0.0140
F1-macro 0.2430 ± 0.0140
This paper
80
DMD++
—
0.2410 ± 0.0170
F1-macro 0.2410 ± 0.0170
This paper
81
GCN
0.2380 ±0.0160
—
F1-macro —
paper 0.2380 ±0.0160
paper 0.2380 ±0.0160 Δ at pub 0.0302
83
DMD-SGC
—
0.2170 ± 0.0360
F1-macro 0.2170 ± 0.0360
This paper
83
SGC
0.2160 ± 0.0390
—
F1-macro —
This paper
89
GPRGNN
0.1520 ± 0.0240
—
F1-macro —
This paper
93
MLP
0.1140 ± 0.0230
—
F1-macro —
This paper

COCO-SP

Global leaderboard →

Default metric is F1. The paper reports 6 values on F1 and 1 value on F1-macro .

#ModelF1 ↑ defaultF1-macro ↑Paper
1
FloydNet
0.4901
—
2
CRaWl
0.4588 ± 0.0079
—
3
GPS
0.4440 ± 0.0065
—
16
GatedGCN
0.3880 ± 0.0040
—
45
GCN
0.2078 ±0.0031
best reported
—
F1-macro —
paper 0.0790 ±0.0250
paper 0.0790 ±0.0250 Δ at pub 0.0548 Δ today 0.1288
60
DMD++
0.0910 ± 0.0090
—
F1-macro —
This paper
62
DMD-SGC
0.0830 ± 0.0120
—
F1-macro —
This paper
63
DMD-GCN
—
0.0810 ± 0.0150
F1-macro 0.0810 ± 0.0150
This paper
72
SGC
0.0560 ± 0.0110
—
F1-macro —
This paper
73
GPRGNN
0.0440 ± 0.0150
—
F1-macro —
This paper
74
MLP
0.0310 ± 0.0160
—
F1-macro —
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 at pub — reported value improved over the best known when published Best today — OK at publication; today's leaderboard best is elsewhere