A Fair Comparison of Graph Neural Networks for Graph Classification
  Experimental reproducibility and replicability are critical topics in machine
learning. Authors have often raised concerns about their lack in scientific
publications to improve the quality of the field. Recently, the graph
representation learning field has attracted the attention of a wide research
community, which resulted in a large stream of works. As such, several Graph
Neural Network models have been developed to effectively tackle graph
classification. However, experimental procedures often lack rigorousness and
are hardly reproducible. Motivated by this, we provide an overview of common
practices that should be avoided to fairly compare with the state of the art.
To counter this troubling trend, we ran more than 47000 experiments in a
controlled and uniform framework to re-evaluate five popular models across nine
common benchmarks. Moreover, by comparing GNNs with structure-agnostic
baselines we provide convincing evidence that, on some datasets, structural
information has not been exploited yet. We believe that this work can
contribute to the development of the graph learning field, by providing a much
needed grounding for rigorous evaluations of graph classification models.
