A Graph Laplacian Eigenvector-based Pre-training Method for Graph Neural Networks

H. Dai, Nyambura Njenga, Hiren Madhu, Siddharth Viswanath, Ryan Pellico, Ian Adelstein, Smita Krishnaswamy

Main figure for A Graph Laplacian Eigenvector-based Pre-training Method for Graph Neural Networks

Abstract

The development of self-supervised graph pre-training methods is a crucial ingredient in recent efforts to design robust graph foundation models (GFMs). Structure-based pre-training methods are under-explored yet crucial for downstream applications which rely on underlying graph structure. In addition, pre-training traditional message passing GNNs to capture global and regional structure is often challenging due to the risk of oversmoothing as network depth increases. We address these gaps by proposing the Laplacian Eigenvector Learning Module (LELM), a novel pre-training module for graph neural networks (GNNs) based on predicting the low-frequency eigenvectors of the graph Laplacian. Moreover, LELM introduces a novel architecture that overcomes oversmoothing, allowing the GNN model to learn long-range interdependencies. Empirically, we show that models pre-trained via our framework outperform baseline models on downstream molecular property prediction tasks.

Benchmark Results

Tested on 1 dataset 2 baseline values reported too low

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

Classic

#ModelMAE ↓Paper
1
TIGT
0.0140 ±0.0010
2
FloydNet
0.0160
3
GSSC
0.0190 ±0.0010
65
GPS
actual #65 vs paper #84 19 places worse
0.0700 ±0.0040
best reported
actual #65 vs paper #84 19 places worse
paper 0.1500
paper 0.1500 Δ at pub 0.0800
69
GIN
actual #69 vs paper #92 23 places worse
0.0880 ±0.0020
best reported
actual #69 vs paper #92 23 places worse
paper 0.2280
paper 0.2280 Δ at pub 0.1400 Δ today 0.1400
76
GPS + LELM
0.1040
This paper
79
GCN
0.1130 ±0.0020
81
GIN + LELM
0.1300
This paper
82
LELM
0.1300
This paper
93
Node degree
0.2380
This paper
95
Lap Eigenvalues
0.2500
This paper
99
Cycle counting
0.2850
This paper
111
Local clustering coefficient
1.4930
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)