[60] J. Peters, P. Buhlmann, and N. Meinshausen. Causal inference by using invariant prediction: identification and confidence intervals. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society: Series B (Statistical Methodology), 78(5):947-1012, 2016. (Cited on pages 1 and 2)
[61] M. Pezeshki, D. Bouchacourt, M. Ibrahim, N. Ballas, P. Vincent, and D. Lopez-Paz. Discovering environments with XRM. arXiv preprint, arXiv:2309.16748, 2023. (Cited on pages 4 and 21)
[62] R. Salakhutdinov and G. E. Hinton. Learning a nonlinear embedding by preserving class neighbourhood structure. In International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, pages 412-419, 2007. (Cited on page 27)
[63] R. Socher, A. Perelygin, J. Wu, J. Chuang, C. D. Manning, A. Y. Ng, and C. Potts. Recursive deep models for semantic compositionality over a sentiment treebank. In Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing, pages 1631-1642, 2013. (Cited on page 30)
[64] Y. Sui, X. Wang, J. Wu, M. Lin, X. He, and T.-S. Chua. Causal attention for interpretable and generalizable graph classification. In Proceedings of the 28th ACM SIGKDD Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining, page 1696–1705, 2022. (Cited on pages 9 and 32)
[65] S. Tao, Q. Cao, H. Shen, Y. Wu, B. Xu, and X. Cheng. Idea: Invariant causal defense for graph adversarial robustness. arXiv preprint, arXiv:2305.15792, 2023. (Cited on page 21)
[66] D. Ulyanov, A. Vedaldi, and V. S. Lempitsky. Instance normalization: The missing ingredient for fast stylization. arXiv preprint, arXiv:1607.08022, 2016. (Cited on page 31)
[67] A. van den Oord, Y. Li, and O. Vinyals. Representation learning with contrastive predictive coding. arXiv preprint, arXiv:1807.03748, 2018. (Cited on page 27)
[68] P. Velicković, G. Cucurull, A. Casanova, A. Romero, P. Lio, and Y. Bengio. Graph attention networks. In International Conference on Learning Representations, 2018. (Cited on page 1)
[69] T. Wang and P. Isola. Understanding contrastive representation learning through alignment and uniformity on the hypersphere. In International Conference on Machine Learning, pages 9929-9939, 2020. (Cited on page 27)
[70] Z. Wang, Y. Chen, Y. Duan, W. Li, B. Han, J. Cheng, and H. Tong. Towards out-of-distribution generalizable predictions of chemical kinetics properties. arXiv preprint, arXiv:2310.03152, 2023. (Cited on page 1)
[71] D. Wolpert and W. Macready. No free lunch theorems for optimization. IEEE Transactions on Evolutionary Computation, 1(1):67-82, 1997. (Cited on pages 2 and 6)
[72] Q. Wu, H. Zhang, J. Yan, and D. Wipf. Handling distribution shifts on graphs: An invariance perspective. In International Conference on Learning Representations, 2022. (Cited on pages 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 20 and 21)
[73] Y. Wu, X. Wang, A. Zhang, X. He, and T.-S. Chua. Discovering invariant rationales for graph neural networks. In International Conference on Learning Representations, 2022. (Cited on pages 1, 2, 4, 9, 21 and 22)
[74] K. Xu, C. Li, Y. Tian, T. Sonobe, K. Kawarabayashi, and S. Jegelka. Representation learning on graphs with jumping knowledge networks. In International Conference on Machine Learning, pages 5449-5458, 2018. (Cited on pages 1 and 31)
[75] K. Xu, W. Hu, J. Leskovec, and S. Jegelka. How powerful are graph neural networks? In International Conference on Learning Representations, 2019. (Cited on pages 1, 9, 20, 22 and 31)
[76] K. Xu, M. Zhang, J. Li, S. S. Du, K. Kawarabayashi, and S. Jegelka. How neural networks extrapolate: From feedforward to graph neural networks. In International Conference on Learning Representations, 2021. (Cited on page 21)