The structure of GNs naturally supports combinatorial generalization because they do not perform
computations strictly at the system level, but also apply shared computations across the entities and
across the relations as well. This allows never-before-seen systems to be reasoned about, because
they are built from familiar components, in a way that re
ects von Humboldt's \innite use of nite
means" (Humboldt, 1836; Chomsky, 1965).
A number of studies have explored GNs' capacity for combinatorial generalization. Battaglia
et al. (2016) found that GNs trained to make one-step physical state predictions could simulate
thousands of future time steps, and also exhibit accurate zero-shot transfer to physical systems
with double, or half, the number of entities experienced during training. Sanchez-Gonzalez et al.
(2018) found similar results in more complex physical control settings, including that GNs trained as
forward models on simulated multi-joint agents could generalize to agents with new numbers of joints.
Hamrick et al. (2018) and Wang et al. (2018b) each found that GN-based decision-making policies
could transfer to novel numbers of entities as well. In combinatorial optimization problems, Bello
22
Artificial intelligence (AI) has undergone a renaissance recently, making
major progress in key domains such as vision, language, control, and
decision-making. This has been due, in part, to cheap data and cheap compute
resources, which have fit the natural strengths of deep learning. However, many
defining characteristics of human intelligence, which developed under much
different pressures, remain out of reach for current approaches. In particular,
generalizing beyond one's experiences--a hallmark of human intelligence from
infancy--remains a formidable challenge for modern AI.
  The following is part position paper, part review, and part unification. We
argue that combinatorial generalization must be a top priority for AI to
achieve human-like abilities, and that structured representations and
computations are key to realizing this objective. Just as biology uses nature
and nurture cooperatively, we reject the false choice between
"hand-engineering" and "end-to-end" learning, and instead advocate for an
approach which benefits from their complementary strengths. We explore how
using relational inductive biases within deep learning architectures can
facilitate learning about entities, relations, and rules for composing them. We
present a new building block for the AI toolkit with a strong relational
inductive bias--the graph network--which generalizes and extends various
approaches for neural networks that operate on graphs, and provides a
straightforward interface for manipulating structured knowledge and producing
structured behaviors. We discuss how graph networks can support relational
reasoning and combinatorial generalization, laying the foundation for more
sophisticated, interpretable, and flexible patterns of reasoning. As a
companion to this paper, we have released an open-source software library for
building graph networks, with demonstrations of how to use them in practice.
Peter W. Battaglia Jessica B. Hamrick Victor Bapst Alvaro Sanchez-Gonzalez Vinicius Zambaldi Mateusz Malinowski Andrea Tacchetti David Raposo Adam Santoro Ryan Faulkner Caglar Gulcehre Francis Song Andrew Ballard Justin Gilmer George Dahl Ashish Vaswani Kelsey Allen Charles Nash Victoria Langston Chris Dyer Nicolas Heess Daan Wierstra Pushmeet Kohli Matt Botvinick Oriol Vinyals Yujia Li Razvan Pascanu