Implicit Relation Linking for Question Answering over Knowledge Graph
Open accessAbstract
Relation linking (RL) is a vital module in knowledge-based question answering (KBQA) systems.It aims to link the relations expressed in natural language (NL) to the corresponding ones in knowledge graph (KG).Existing methods mainly rely on the textual similarities between NL and KG to build relation links.Due to the ambiguity of NL and the incompleteness of KG, many relations in NL are implicitly expressed, and may not link to a single relation in KG, which challenges the current methods.In this paper, we propose an implicit RL method called ImRL, which links relation phrases in NL to relation paths in KG.To find proper relation paths, we propose a novel path ranking model that aligns not only textual information in the word embedding space but also structural information in the KG embedding space between relation phrases in NL and relation paths in KG.Besides, we leverage a gated mechanism with attention to inject prior knowledge from external paraphrase dictionaries to address the relation phrases with vague meaning.Our experiments on two benchmark and a newly-created datasets show that ImRL significantly outperforms several state-of-theart methods, especially for implicit RL.
AI snapshot
Written from the paper’s full text.
TL;DR
ImRL links relation phrases in natural language to relation paths in knowledge graphs by aligning word and KG embeddings and injecting paraphrase-dictionary knowledge via a gated attention mechanism. On LC-QuAD, QALD-9, and a new PathSQ dataset, it outperforms six state-of-the-art relation linking methods, especially for implicit relation linking.
Key findings
- ImRL achieves the best reported results on all three datasets: LC-QuAD P 0.59 / R 0.49 / F1 0.54, QALD-9 P 0.51 / R 0.46 / F1 0.48, and PathSQ P 0.46 / R 0.41 / F1 0.43, outperforming methods including SimReL, SLING, Falcon, EARL, ReMatch, and SIBKB.
- On QALD-9, for the 94% of questions with explicit single relations, ImRL reaches F1 0.48; for the remaining 6% with implicit relations, F1 reaches 0.47. On PathSQ, where all questions require implicit relation paths, ImRL dominates all three metrics.
- Ablation on QALD-9 shows removing KG embeddings drops F1 by 0.04 (0.48 to 0.44), removing word embeddings drops it by 0.09 (0.48 to 0.39), and using string matching without embeddings gives F1 0.27. Knowledge injection with GATE gives F1 0.48, versus MEAN 0.47, CAT 0.46, and None 0.45.
- Replacing the relation linking module in gAnswer with ImRL increases KBQA F1 by about 3.2% on LC-QuAD; SimReL reports 2.4% for comparison. On QALD-9, among 46 test questions with relations unseen in training, ImRL correctly predicts 10.
Methods
- ImRL has two parts: path generation and path ranking. Path generation uses Falcon for entity linking, dependency-tree/BFS and AMR-based relation identification, and candidate generation over relation paths up to M=2 hops, selecting c=30 candidates by local-name cosine similarity.
- Path ranking encodes relation paths with BERT/FFNN in a word embedding space and RotatE in a KG embedding space; it encodes the relation phrase with question context similarly, scores phrase-path pairs by dot product, and trains with MSE loss plus cross-entropy loss.
- Knowledge injection uses the Paraphrase dictionary (2,284 relations and 31,130 paraphrase pairs) as Keys/Values, applies attention to select relevant paraphrases, and fuses them via a gated mechanism. Experiments use LC-QuAD 1.0 (5,000 questions, 1% implicit), QALD-9 (408 training, 150 test, 6% implicit), and PathSQ (400 two-hop implicit questions), with precision, recall, and F1.
Limitations
- The paper states that paraphrase dictionaries have limitations: different dictionaries target different KGs and may need adjustment according to the KG schema. It also states error propagation in the pipeline can cause correct relation paths to be missing from the candidate set, lowering recall relative to precision; with gold candidates, F1 rises to 0.57.
- The paper states that absence of entities greatly impacts ImRL: in a QALD-9 case with no entity, SimReL returns null and ImRL returns the wrong dbo:origin, and linking such a relation requires understanding the noun phrase, which all existing RL methods including ImRL cannot do.
- Evident from the text: PathSQ only considers two-hop relation paths, and candidate generation uses maximum path length M=2, so longer paths are not evaluated; the paper also leaves combining entity linking and implicit RL for future work.
Model-written summary. Check it against the paper before relying on it.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
24 of 37 cited sources checked · 11 supported · 0 flagged · accuracy not yet measured
- Interpretationnone given
Unlike prior path ranking studies for KG completion that leverage entities and relations in the KG for path reasoning, our path ranking model additionally considers the relation phrase in the question for ranking.
“Different from those studies using path ranking algorithm for KG completion (Lao et al., 2011;Gardner et al., 2014;Mazumder and Liu, 2017;Das et al., 2018), which leverage the entities and relations in the KG for path reasoning, our path ranking model additionally considers the relation phrase in the question for ranking.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim2 of 3 sources checked - Premisecitation
Existing relation linking methods mainly rely on textual similarities between natural language and knowledge graph to build relation links.
“Existing methods mainly rely on the textual similarities between NL and KG to build relation links.”
- Also stated in: § Question: · plain
“Previous studies (Mulang et al., 2017;Singh et al., 2017;Naseem et al., 2021) focus on the similarities between the relation phrases and the text descriptions (e.g., local names) of relations in KG, and use the textual measures to link them.”
- Also stated in: § 2 Related Work · plain
“For the first task, ReMatch (Mulang et al., 2017), SIBKB (Singh et al., 2017) and EERL (Pan et al., 2019) generate candidates by running a textual similarity-based method over prebuilt dictionaries constructed by analyzing the NL patterns contained in massive text corpora through frequent item mining or crowdsourcing.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim1 of 3 sources checked- cites Mulang et al., 2017
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- cites Singh et al., 2017 source
- cites Naseem et al., 2021 source
The Introduction says relation linking is addressed primarily using question text, and Related Work says most earlier methods rely on question text or its dependency parse. Neither passage establishes that these methods mainly rely on textual similarity between natural language and knowledge-graph labels; Related Work instead describes a range of rules and NLP tools. (LLM, conf=0.82)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
- Also stated in: § Question: · plain
- Premisecitation
Entity linking can affect relation linking (RL).
“Recent studies (Singh et al., 2018) have shown that entity linking can affect RL.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim1 of 1 sources checked- cites Singh et al., 2018 source
The Motivating Example (Section 2; page unavailable) places named entity disambiguation before relation linking, and Section 3.1 describes both tasks as transformations of a question’s representation. This supports a possible connection, but the cited passages do not report that changing entity-linking results affects relation-linking performance. (LLM, conf=0.76)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
- Premisecitation
The existing tool Falcon has shown accurate results on entity linking, around 0.83 F1-score on the LC-QuAD dataset as reported.
“which has shown accurate results on entity linking (around 0.83 of F1-score on the LC-QuAD dataset as reported).”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim1 of 1 sources checked- cites Sakor et al., 2019 source
The supplied passages and indexed search results contain only bibliographic metadata, with no results section or page addressing Falcon’s entity-linking performance. Searches for Falcon, LC-QuAD, and 0.83 F1-score found no passage that verifies the reported figure. (LLM, conf=0.72)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
- Premisecitation
RotatE has the properties of composition and symmetry of relations.
“and have the properties of composition and symmetry of relations”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim1 of 1 sources checked- cites Sun et al., 2019 source
- Premisecitation
In ComplexWebQuestions, the proportion of implicit relations is also small.
“As for other KBQA datasets, e.g., ComplexWebQuestions (Talmor and Berant, 2018), the proportion of implicit relations is also small.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim1 of 1 sources checked- cites Talmor and Berant, 2018 source
Section 4.2 describes the proportions of question types in ComplexWebQuestions, but does not report a proportion of implicit relations. Searches for “implicit relations” and related terms found no passage in our copy that addresses that proportion; the reported percentages for word reordering concern a different measure. Page numbers were not available in our copy. (LLM, conf=0.75)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
- Premisecitation
In SimpleQuestions, some questions have corresponding single relations in Freebase but need to be expressed using multiple relations in DBpedia.
“In SimpleQuestions (Bordes et al., 2015), some questions have corresponding single relations in Freebase but need to be expressed using multiple relations in DBpedia.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim1 of 1 sources checked- cites Bordes et al., 2015 source
Section 2.2 (p. 3) says each SimpleQuestions question is paired with a Freebase fact, and Section 2 (p. 2) describes answering such questions through a single relationship. The paper does not address whether those questions require multiple relations in DBpedia. (LLM, conf=0.88)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
- Findingown data
Experiments on two benchmark datasets and a newly-created dataset show that ImRL significantly outperforms several state-of-the-art methods, especially for implicit relation linking.
“Our experiments on two benchmark and a newly-created datasets show that ImRL significantly outperforms several state-of-theart methods, especially for implicit RL.”
- Also stated in: § Question: · plain
“Our results show that ImRL outperforms several state-of-the-art competitors, especially for linking implicit relations.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Also stated in: § Question: · plain
- Findingown data
PathSQ is a new dataset constructed by the authors for implicit relation linking evaluation.
“Path-based SimpleQuestions dataset (PathSQ) is a new dataset constructed by ourselves for implicit RL evaluation.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Findingreasoning
The recall of ImRL is lower than its precision.
“the recall of ImRL is lower than precision.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim - Findingown data
For the remaining 6% of questions with implicit relations in QALD-9, ImRL achieves an F1-score of 0.47.
“For the remaining 6% questions with implicit relations in QALD-9, the F1-score of our method can reach 0.47.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Findingown data
All methods with knowledge injection achieve better results than those without it.
“All methods with injection achieve better results than those without it”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Findingown data
In the KG embedding space, the embedding of the relation path dbo:birthPlace → dbo:location is most similar to that of the relation dbo:nationality.
“In the KG embedding space, through the visualization (see Figure 5), we find that the embedding of the relation path dbo:birthPlace → dbo:location (color: red) is most similar to that of the relation dbo:nationality (color: orange).”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Findingown data
When c reaches 30, the increment of c has little influence on the model performance.
“However, when c reaches 30, the increment of c has little influence on the model performance.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Findingown data
PathSQ contains 400 questions that need to be linked through a two-hop relation path.
“contains 400 questions that need to be linked through a two-hop relation path.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim - Findingreasoning
On PathSQ, ImRL dominates in terms of all three evaluation metrics (precision, recall, F1), while other methods obtain rather poor results.
“As shown in Table 2, ImRL dominates in terms of all the three evaluation metrics, while the other methods obtain rather poor results.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Findingown data
In the QALD-9 testing set, there are 46 questions whose relations have never appeared in the training set.
“Taking QALD-9 as an example, there are 46 questions in the testing set whose relations have never appeared in the training set.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Findingown data
Replacing the RL module of gAnswer with ImRL results in about a 3.2% increase of F1-score on LC-QuAD.
“We choose gAnswer (Hu et al., 2018) as the baseline KBQA system, and replace its RL module with ImRL, which results in about 3.2% increase of F1score”
- Also stated in: § B Case Study of KBQA Results · plain
“Compared with the original gAnswer, the overall F1-score increases by 3.2%.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked- cites Hu et al., 2018
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Also stated in: § B Case Study of KBQA Results · plain
- Findingreasoning
Among all injection methods, ImRL with a gated mechanism achieves the best results.
“Among all the methods, ImRL with a gated mechanism achieves the best results.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Findingown data
Under the assumption that the correct relation path is always in the relation path candidate set (gold standard input to Path Ranking), ImRL achieves an F1-score of 0.57.
“Under this assumption, the F1-score of the model can reach 0.57”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Findingown data
Removing KG embeddings from ImRL drops the F1-score by 0.04.
“By removing the use of KG embeddings, the F1-score drops by 0.04”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Findingown data
ImRL leverages the path ranking model to find the path that best expresses the meaning of 'army ... involved in'.
“Differently, ImRL leverages the path ranking model to find the path that best expresses the meaning of”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Findingown data
Removing word embeddings from ImRL drops the F1-score by 0.09.
“while by removing the use of word embeddings, it drops by 0.09.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Findingreasoning
For QALD-9 questions with explicit single relations, ImRL achieves an F1-score of 0.48.
“For those questions, the F1-score of ImRL can reach 0.48”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Findingown data
ImRL achieves state-of-the-art results on the LC-QuAD and QALD-9 datasets.
“From the table, ImRL achieves the state-of-the-art results on LC-QuAD and QALD-9.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Premisecitation
Knowledge graphs are widely acknowledged as incomplete.
“However, KG is widely acknowledged as incomplete (Wang et al., 2017)”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked- cites Wang et al., 2017 source
- Interpretationreasoning
ImRL links relation phrases in natural language to relation paths in the knowledge graph.
“we propose an implicit RL method called ImRL, which links relation phrases in NL to relation paths in KG.”
- Also stated in: § Question: · plain
“we propose a new RL method called ImRL that links relation phrases in NL to relation paths in KG.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim- Rests on an assumption: Relation paths in the knowledge graph can express missing relations through similar meaning.
- Also stated in: § Question: · plain
- Premisecitation
KG embeddings have a certain ability for reasoning.
“According to (Wang et al., 2017), KG embeddings have a certain ability for reasoning.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked- cites Wang et al., 2017 source
- Interpretationreasoning
In the motivating example, the entity and answer can only be linked through an implicit relation path expressing a similar meaning as dbo:country.
“Therefore, it is only possible to link them through an implicit relation path expressing a similar meaning as dbo:country.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim- Rests on an assumption: Relation paths in the knowledge graph can express missing relations through similar meaning.
- Interpretationreasoning
ImRL's path ranking model aligns textual information in the word embedding space and structural information in the knowledge graph embedding space between relation phrases in natural language and relation paths in the knowledge graph.
“we propose a novel path ranking model that aligns not only textual information in the word embedding space but also structural information in the KG embedding space between relation phrases in NL and relation paths in KG.”
- Also stated in: § Question: · plain
“we propose a novel path ranking model that captures both textual information in the word embedding space and structural information in the KG embedding space, and align them between relation phrases in NL and relation paths in KG.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim- Rests on an assumption: The structural information in knowledge graph embeddings can capture the correlation between single relations and relation paths.
- Also stated in: § Question: · plain
- Interpretationreasoning
ImRL leverages a gated mechanism with attention to inject prior knowledge from external paraphrase dictionaries to address relation phrases with vague meaning.
“Besides, we leverage a gated mechanism with attention to inject prior knowledge from external paraphrase dictionaries to address the relation phrases with vague meaning.”
- Also stated in: § Question: · plain
“ImRL leverages a gated mechanism with attention to inject prior knowledge from external dictionaries into the model, and integrates all the information to predict the links between implicit relation phrases and relations (or relation paths) in KG.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim- Rests on an assumption: A gated mechanism with attention can effectively inject prior knowledge from external paraphrase dictionaries to provide auxiliary information for relation phrases with vague meanings.
- Also stated in: § Question: · plain
- Premisecitation
In the motivating example, the knowledge graph (e.g., DBpedia) is incomplete, leading to no direct relation between dbr:Dragonaut:_The_Resonance and dbr:Japan.
“However, handling the above question faces two challenges: (1) KG (e.g., DBpedia) is incomplete, which leads to the situation that there is no direct relation between the entity dbr:Dragonaut:_The_Resonance and the answer dbr:Japan.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked- cites Azmy et al., 2018
- Interpretationcitation
The situation of relation linking through implicit relation paths may occur frequently in question answering.
“which shows that the situation of RL through implicit relation paths may occur in question answering frequently.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Interpretationreasoning
Using the KG embedding of the relation path between two entities to train the model is equivalent to making the KG embedding of a relation phrase reflect the KG embedding of the relation path connecting those entities.
“This is equivalent to directly using the KG embedding of relation path between the two entities to train the model.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim- The authors state this as an assumption: The KG embedding of a relation phrase should reflect the KG embedding of the relation path in the KG connecting the entities.
- Interpretationreasoning
ImRL performs well for explicit relation linking even without a specific design for explicit RL.
“showing that even without a specific design for explicit RL, ImRL still performs well for it.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Interpretationown data
ImRL can help existing KBQA systems.
“verifying that our method can indeed help the existing KBQA systems.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Premisecitation
Paths with more relations are generally rare and spurious.
“We only consider two-hop relation paths, since paths with more relations are generally rare and spurious (Azmy et al., 2018).”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked- cites Azmy et al., 2018
- Interpretationreasoning
With the help of KG representation learning, the embeddings of the two kinds of relations (dbo and dbp) can be learned to have similar meanings.
“However, with the help of KG representation learning, the embeddings of the two kinds of relations can be learned to have similar meanings.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim- Rests on an assumption: Due to DBpedia's organizational structure, namespaces dbo and dbp have different representations of the same relations.
- Interpretationown data
The gap between relations expressed in natural language and those in the knowledge graph is quite large.
“this also shows that the gap between the relations expressed in NL and those in KG is quite large.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Interpretationown data
The steps before Path Ranking have a great impact on the model.
“which shows that the aforementioned steps have a great impact on the model.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Interpretationown data
The correct prediction of 10 unseen relation questions shows the generalization of ImRL.
“which shows the generalization of ImRL.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Interpretationown data
ImRL achieves implicit RL by expressing missing relation dbo:nationality between the entities with relation path dbo:birthPlace → dbo:location.
“It shows that ImRL achieves implicit RL by expressing missing relation dbo:nationality between the entities with relation path dbo:birthPlace → dbo:location.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Interpretationown data
ImRL can capture the context information 'date' with the language model.
“The main reason is that ImRL can capture the context information”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Interpretationown data
ImRL can handle unseen relations in the inference phase.
“Furthermore, ImRL can also handle unseen relations in the inference phase.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Interpretationown data
ImRL is an implicit RL method that can better deal with the linking of implicit relations in natural language and incomplete knowledge graphs.
“We propose ImRL, an implicit RL method that can better deal with the linking of implicit relations in NL and incomplete KG.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
- May combine two claims. 33
- Classified as probably not a substantial claim. 24
- The quote only partly states this claim. 2
May combine two claims.
PremisecitationThe Paraphrase dictionary maps natural language patterns to DBpedia relations and currently covers 2,284 relations and 31,130 paraphrase pairs.
“Paraphrase maps NL patterns to DBpedia relations, which currently covers 2,284 relations and 31,130 paraphrase pairs.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim1 of 1 sources checked- cites Xue et al., 2020 source
May combine two claims.
PremisecitationExisting relation linking methods perform well on several benchmark datasets but are still challenged by implicit relations prevalent in the real world.
“However, according to (Sakor et al., 2019), while existing RL methods perform well on several benchmark datasets, they are still challenged by implicit relations prevalent in the real world.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim1 of 1 sources checked- cites Sakor et al., 2019 source
The supplied passages are bibliographic metadata, with no section or page discussing relation-linking performance. Searches for benchmark performance and implicit relations returned no substantive full-text passage; the only topical text returned was an abstract, which cannot serve as evidence under the stated rubric. (LLM, conf=0.70)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
May combine two claims.
PremisereasoningFalcon and SLING perform poorly for other kinds of implicit relations and cannot handle relation linking through relation paths.
“However, they perform poorly for other kinds of implicit relations, and cannot handle RL through relation paths either.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim2 of 2 sources checked- cites Sakor et al., 2019 source
The available indexed passages are bibliographic metadata (no section or page), not discussion of Falcon or SLING. Searches for implicit relations, poor performance, and relation paths found no passage addressing either claimed limitation. (LLM, conf=0.72)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measured - cites Mihindukulasooriya et al., 2020 source
The Qualitative Analysis (p. 10) supports a limitation in SLING: for a grandchildren question requiring two child relations, it did not decompose the question into two triples. But the Results (p. 9) say SLING identified a relation implicit in the question, and the cited passages do not establish that Falcon and SLING generally perform poorly on other implicit relations or cannot handle relation paths as a class. (LLM, conf=0.82)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
May combine two claims.
PremisecitationEERL discovers implicit relations by using domains and ranges of properties in the knowledge graph, but it cannot handle relation linking through relation paths.
“For instance, EERL discovers the implicit relations by using the domains and ranges of properties in KG, but it cannot handle the issue of RL through relation paths.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim1 of 1 sources checked- cites Pan et al., 2019 source
The available Abstract describes EERL as using entities extracted from questions and DBpedia entities to compute relation candidates. Searches for property domains and ranges, implicit relations, and relation paths found no passage addressing those specific claims. The available copy therefore does not establish either the proposed mechanism or the asserted limitation. (LLM, conf=0.72)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
Classified as probably not a substantial claim.
PremisecitationAMR can effectively capture semantic information at the sentence level.
“according to (Mihindukulasooriya et al., 2020), AMR can effectively capture the semantic information at the sentence level”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim1 of 1 sources checked- cites Mihindukulasooriya et al., 2020 source
May combine two claims.
PremisecitationMany relations in natural language are implicitly expressed and may not link to a single relation in the knowledge graph because of ambiguity in natural language and incompleteness of the knowledge graph.
“Due to the ambiguity of NL and the incompleteness of KG, many relations in NL are implicitly expressed, and may not link to a single relation in KG, which challenges the current methods.”
- Also stated in: § Question: · plain
“However, according to (Sakor et al., 2019), while existing RL methods perform well on several benchmark datasets, they are still challenged by implicit relations prevalent in the real world.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim1 of 1 sources checked- cites Sakor et al., 2019 source
The passages supplied from our copy contain bibliographic metadata, not the paper’s discussion. Searches for implicitly expressed relations, natural-language ambiguity, knowledge-graph incompleteness, and linking to a single relation returned no substantive passage addressing the claim. (LLM, conf=0.72)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
- Also stated in: § Question: · plain
Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).
PremisecitationPrevious works pre-collect paraphrase pairs between relation phrases in natural language and KG relations through frequent item mining or crowdsourcing.
“The previous works (Nakashole et al., 2012;Xue et al., 2020) pre-collect some paraphrase pairs (e.g.,”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim1 of 2 sources checked- cites Nakashole et al., 2012
- cites Xue et al., 2020 source
May combine two claims.
PremisecitationThe paraphrase dictionary constructed by Xue et al. (2020) establishes a mapping relationship between natural language phrases and relations in the knowledge graph, which can be prior knowledge for implicit relation phrases with vague meanings.
“Considering the work (Xue et al., 2020) that constructs a dictionary of paraphrases and establishes a mapping relationship between NL phrases and relations in KG, which can be prior knowledge for implicit relation phrases with vague meanings”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim1 of 1 sources checked- cites Xue et al., 2020 source
Split into 2 atoms — 1 confirmed, 1 partially supported, 0 disputed, 0 misattributed, 0 unverifiable. Expand the claim to see per-atom verdicts.
Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
May combine two claims.
Premisecitation93.8% of people in Freebase do not have place of birth, and 78.5% of people do not have nationality.
“Besides, according to the statistics in (Stadelmaier and Padó, 2019), 93.8% of people in Freebase do not have place of birth, and 78.5% of people do not have nationality”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim1 of 1 sources checked- cites Stadelmaier and Padó, 2019 source
Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).
PremisecitationLC-QuAD 1.0 contains 5,000 questions and corresponding SPARQL queries over DBpedia version 2016-04.
“LC-QuAD 1.0 (Trivedi et al., 2017) is a large complex questions dataset for KBQA, which contains 5,000 questions and corresponding SPARQL queries over DBpedia (version 2016-04).”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim1 of 1 sources checked- cites Trivedi et al., 2017 source
Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.
PremisecitationSimReL uses AMR for question representation and employs a Siamese network with BERT to link relations in an end-to-end manner.
“SimReL (Naseem et al., 2021) also uses AMR for question representation, and employs a Siamese network with BERT to link relations in an end-to-end manner.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim1 of 1 sources checked- cites Naseem et al., 2021 source
Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).
PremisecitationSimReL reports its F1-score improvement on LC-QuAD as 2.4%.
“As a reference, SimReL reports its F1-score improvement on LC-QuAD as 2.4% (Naseem et al., 2021).”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim1 of 1 sources checked- cites Naseem et al., 2021 source
The Results and Discussion section reports that incorporating AMR into relation linking improved the NSQA system’s F1 on the LC-QuAD 1.0 test set by 2.4, reaching 44.5. It does not describe this as a 2.4% relative improvement, and the reported gain is for the integrated KBQA system rather than SemReL’s standalone relation-linking F1. (LLM, conf=0.88)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.
PremisecitationSLING leverages AMR for preprocessing, trains a Transformer-based model based on distant supervision, and integrates several complementary signals for relation linking.
“SLING (Mihindukulasooriya et al., 2020) leverages AMR for preprocessing, trains a Transformer-based model based on distant supervision, and integrates several complementary signals for RL.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim1 of 1 sources checked- cites Mihindukulasooriya et al., 2020 source
Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).
PremisecitationFalcon enhances entity and relation linking through cross-KG entity and relation alignment and basic principles of English morphology.
“Falcon (Sakor et al., 2019) enhances entity and relation linking through cross-KG entity and relation alignment and basic principles of English morphology.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim1 of 1 sources checked- cites Sakor et al., 2019 source
The supplied passages are bibliographic metadata, and searches for cross-KG alignment, English morphology, and Falcon's method returned no passage from the paper's body. The indexed abstract addresses the claim, but the audit rules exclude abstracts as evidence, so the claimed mechanism cannot be verified from eligible passages. (LLM, conf=0.69)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.
PremisecitationEARL models the linking problem as the generalized traveling salesman problem and uses connection density to link entities and relations jointly.
“EARL (Dubey et al., 2018) models the linking problem as the generalized traveling salesman problem, and uses connection density to link entities and relations jointly.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim1 of 1 sources checked- cites Dubey et al., 2018 source
May combine two claims.
FindingreasoningIn Figure 3, gAnswer's relation linking module incorrectly links the relation to dbo:birthPlace, leading to a wrong SPARQL query and wrong answer; ImRL correctly identifies dbo:birthDate, modifies the SPARQL query and returns the correct answer.
“In Figure 3, the relation linking module of gAnswer incorrectly links the relation in the question to dbo:birthPlace, which leads to the wrong SPARQL query and the wrong answer.In contrast, ImRL can correctly identify the relation dbo:birthDate, modify the SPARQL query and return the correct answer.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claimProbably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).
Findingown dataIn the first PathSQ case, the relation phrase 'involved in' needs to be expressed using the relation path dbo:commander → dbo:militaryBranch according to the gold standard.
“In the first case from PathSQ, the relation phrase”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claimMay combine two claims.
Findingown dataEntity dbr:Rudi_Hedman does not have relation dbo:nationality in DBpedia, so the gold relation path dbo:nationality is missing in the candidate list.
“However, since entity dbr:Rudi_Hedman does not have relation dbo:nationality in DBpedia, the gold relation path dbo:nationality is missing in the candidate list.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claimMay combine two claims.
FindingreasoningIn the second case, there is no entity in the QALD-9 question, which causes SimReL to be unable to enumerate any candidate relations since it depends on entity linking.
“In the second case, there is no entity in this question of QALD-9”
- Also stated in: § Ablation study of embedding models. · plain
“causes that SimReL cannot enumerate any candidate relations since it depends on the result of entity linking.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim- Also stated in: § Ablation study of embedding models. · plain
The quote only partly states this claim.
Findingown dataImRL correctly predicts 10 of the 46 QALD-9 testing questions with unseen relations.
“Still, ImRL can correctly predict 10 of them”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claimProbably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).
Findingown dataPathSQ is based on DBpedia version 2016-04.
“It is based on DBpedia (version 2016-04)”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claimMay combine two claims.
FindingreasoningIn Figure 4, ImRL does not recognize the same relation dbo:foundedBy as the gold SPARQL query, but it recognizes dbp:founder, which is actually equivalent to dbo:foundedBy.
“In Figure 4, although ImRL does not recognize the same relation dbo:foundedBy as the gold SPARQL query, it recognizes dbp:founder, which is actually equivalent to dbo:foundedBy.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claimMay combine two claims.
Findingown dataAlthough ImRL's candidate generation is more robust, the absence of entities has a great impact on it, making it give the wrong answer dbo:origin.
“Although the method of generating candidates of ImRL is more robust, the absence of entities also has a great impact on it, making it give the wrong answer dbo:origin.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claimMay combine two claims.
Findingown dataWith the increase of candidate path number c, MRR, Hits@c and F1-score all increase.
“As shown in Table6, with the increase of c, MRR, Hits@c and F1-score all increase.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claimMay combine two claims.
Findingown dataImRL achieves superior performance on LC-QuAD and QALD-9, where relations are mostly explicit, and PathSQ, where relations are all implicit.
“The results show that our method achieves superior performance on LC-QuAD and QALD-9, where the relations are mostly explicit, and PathSQ, where the relations are all implicit”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claimClassified as probably not a substantial claim.
Findingnone givenIn the QALD-9 dataset, 94% of the questions contain explicit single relations.
“Take QALD-9 for example, 94% of the questions are with explicit single relations.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claimMay combine two claims.
FindingreasoningSimReL returns dbo:militaryBranch for the first case because it can only find the single relation whose meaning is most similar to the meaning of the whole question.
“The state-of-the-art method SimReL returns dbo:militaryBranch, as it can only find the single relation whose meaning is most similar to the meaning of the whole question as the answer.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claimClassified as probably not a substantial claim.
PremisecitationUsing rules to transform a dependency tree into a directed graph and using a heuristic search to find the shortest path between two nodes can effectively decompose a complex question into multiple simple triples, thereby discovering relations.
“Inspired by (Hu et al., 2018), which demonstrates that using rules to transform the dependency tree into a directed graph and using a heuristic search to find the shortest path between two nodes can effectively decompose the complex question into multiple simple triples, thereby discovering the relations.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked- cites Hu et al., 2018
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
Classified as probably not a substantial claim.
PremisereasoningValues provide both textual and structural knowledge of natural language and KG.
“Values provide both textual and structural knowledge of NL and KG.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim- Rests on an assumption: Paraphrases can be considered as prior knowledge about the diverse meanings of natural language.
May combine two claims.
InterpretationcitationBecause knowledge graphs are incomplete, for some relation phrases it is not possible to find a corresponding single relation in the KG, and the phrase needs to be expressed by a relation path.
“which makes it fail to find the corresponding single relations in KG for some phrases and needs to be expressed by relation paths.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claimClassified as probably not a substantial claim.
InterpretationreasoningConventional relation linking can be regarded as a simpler case of the extended relation linking task when the relation path is one hop.
“We extend the RL task to link phrases to relation paths, where conventional RL can be regarded as a simpler case when the path is one hop.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claimProbably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.
PremisecitationQALD-9 provides 408 training questions and 150 test questions.
“It provides 408 training questions and 150 test questions”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked- cites Usbeck et al., 2018
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
Classified as probably not a substantial claim.
PremisereasoningKeys provide textual knowledge from the perspective of natural language.
“Keys provide textual knowledge from the perspective of NL”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim- Rests on an assumption: Paraphrases can be considered as prior knowledge about the diverse meanings of natural language.
Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).
Premisenone given6% of QALD-9 questions need implicit relation linking.
“6% of which need implicit RL.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claimProbably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).
Premisenone givenOnly 1% of LC-QuAD 1.0 questions involve implicit relation links.
“Only 1% of the questions involve implicit relation links.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claimMay combine two claims.
Interpretationown dataExisting benchmarks contain few implicit relations and cannot be used to evaluate implicit relation linking well.
“Existing benchmarks contain few implicit relations and cannot be used to evaluate implicit RL well.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claimProbably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).
Premisenone givenAll six state-of-the-art methods compared support relation linking over DBpedia.
“We compare our ImRL with six state-of-the-art methods.All of them support RL over DBpedia.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claimMay combine two claims.
InterpretationreasoningImRL can capture similar relationships between dbo and dbp through the KG embedding module, showing that ImRL can leverage the structural information in the KG.
“Thus, ImRL can capture similar relationships between dbo and dbp through the KG embedding module, which also shows that ImRL can leverage the structural information in the KG.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim- Rests on an assumption: Due to DBpedia's organizational structure, namespaces dbo and dbp have different representations of the same relations.
Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.
PremisecitationRematch exploits WordNet and dependency parsing to model relation phrases with their underlying parts of speech, and uses various similarity metrics for ranking.
“Rematch (Mulang et al., 2017) exploits Word-Net and dependency parsing to model relation phrases with their underlying parts of speech, and uses various similarity metrics for ranking.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked- cites Mulang et al., 2017
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
Classified as probably not a substantial claim.
Interpretationnone givenLeveraging word embeddings and KG embeddings is common to both implicit and explicit relations.
“The reason is that leveraging word embeddings and KG embeddings is common to both implicit and explicit relations.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claimMay combine two claims.
Interpretationnone givenAll questions in PathSQ need to be linked through implicit relation paths, which is challenging for existing methods.
“This is because all the questions in PathSQ need to be linked through implicit relation paths, which is challenging for the existing methods.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claimMay combine two claims.
InterpretationreasoningImRL can achieve reasoning of relation paths according to the composition property of KG embeddings, thereby effectively improving the accuracy of implicit RL.
“By contrast, ImRL can achieve the reasoning of relation paths according to the composition property of KG embeddings, thereby effectively improving the accuracy of implicit RL.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claimClassified as probably not a substantial claim. May combine two claims.
InterpretationreasoningFor explicit relations, because they usually contain a single relation, both R_Encoder and P_Encoder only need to encode one relation phrase or relation local name, which makes the matching of word embeddings easier.
“For explicit relations, since they usually contain a single relation, both R_Encoder and P _Encoder only need to encode one relation phrase or relation local name, which makes the matching of word embeddings easier.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claimProbably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.
PremisecitationSIBKB uses PATTY as the underlying knowledge source and establishes a bipartite graph index from common phrases in natural language to KG relations for relation linking.
“SIBKB (Singh et al., 2017) uses PATTY as the underlying knowledge source, and establishes a bipartite graph index from common phrases in NL to KG relations for RL.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked- cites Singh et al., 2017 source
May combine two claims.
Interpretationown dataImRL can not only deal with relation phrases that are not explicitly expressed in natural language, but also perform relation path reasoning in the knowledge graph.
“demonstrating that ImRL can not only deal with relation phrases that are not explicitly expressed in NL, but also perform relation path reasoning in KG.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claimThe quote only partly states this claim.
Interpretationown dataThe better results of all injection methods verify the effectiveness of knowledge injection.
“which verifies the effectiveness of knowledge injection.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claimMay combine two claims.
Interpretationown dataThe knowledge in the dictionary may bring noises; combining part of the external knowledge and the original embeddings of the phrases can supplement more accurate external knowledge to enhance representations of implicit relation phrases.
“This shows that the knowledge in the dictionary may also bring noises, thus by combining part of the external knowledge and the original embeddings of the phrases, more accurate external knowledge can be supplemented to enhance the representations of implicit relation phrases.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claimClassified as probably not a substantial claim.
InterpretationreasoningThe root cause of word embeddings being more important is that pre-trained language models (e.g., BERT) are trained on huge corpora with several downstream tasks, thus word embeddings can provide more prior knowledge.
“We believe that the root cause to the phenomenon is that pre-trained language models, e.g., BERT, are trained on huge corpora with several downstream tasks, thus the word embeddings can provide more prior knowledge.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claimMay combine two claims.
InterpretationreasoningImRL outperforms the latest method SimReL due to the use of KG embeddings and external knowledge of paraphrase dictionary as additional information.
“due to the use of KG embeddings and external knowledge of paraphrase dictionary as additional information, ImRL outperforms the latest method SimReL without the two information.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claimMay combine two claims.
InterpretationreasoningThe KG embedding model used by ImRL (RotatE) is trained on a small-scale corpus, and its embeddings focus on limited structural information, leading to KG embeddings providing relatively less information than word embeddings.
“While the KG embedding model used by ImRL, i.e., RotatE, is trained on a smallscale corpus, and the obtained embeddings more focus on limited structural information, which leads to that the KG embeddings provide relatively less information than the word embeddings.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claimMay combine two claims.
InterpretationreasoningPath generation may cause correct relation paths to be missing in the candidate set, which causes the recall of ImRL to be lower than its precision.
“since the path generation may cause correct relation paths missing in the candidate set, the recall of ImRL is lower than precision.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claimMay combine two claims.
Interpretationown dataEven if lots of additional information is considered, it is still difficult to pick the most correct relation path from a set of candidates, which reveals the challenge of the relation linking task.
“Even if lots of additional information is considered, it is still difficult to pick the most correct one from a set of relation path candidates, which reveals the challenge of RL task.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
The paper relies on this without support.
The structural information in knowledge graph embeddings can capture the correlation between single relations and relation paths.
“ImRL can also use the structural information possessed by KG embeddings to capture the correlation between single relations and relation paths”
The paper relies on this without support.
A gated mechanism with attention can effectively inject prior knowledge from external paraphrase dictionaries to provide auxiliary information for relation phrases with vague meanings.
“which can provide auxiliary information for the relation phrases with vague meanings”
The paper relies on this without support.
Relation paths in the knowledge graph can express missing relations through similar meaning.
“expressing the missing relations through similar relation paths in the incomplete KG”
The paper relies on this without support.
Existing RL methods only consider single relations when generating candidates.
“Existing RL methods only consider single relations when generating candidates.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Most existing RL methods mainly focus on the local names of KG relations and leverage language models to capture the semantics, but they ignore the structural information in massive triples.
“Most existing RL methods mainly focus on the local names of KG relations, and leverage language models to capture the semantics.However, they ignore the structural information in massive triples.”
The paper relies on this without support.
There is no prior work focusing on using KG embedding for implicit RL.
“To the best of our knowledge, there is no prior work focusing on using KG embedding for implicit RL.”
The paper relies on this without support.
The relations in KG can provide rich information.
“The relations in KG can provide rich information.”
The paper relies on this without support.
In natural language questions, relation phrases need to be encoded into two spaces to capture different aspects of information.
“in NL questions also need to be encoded into two spaces to capture different aspects of information.”
The paper relies on this without support.
A relation phrase in a question creates a connection between entities.
“In a question, a relation phrase s creates a connection between entities”
The authors state this as an assumption.
The KG embedding of a relation phrase should reflect the KG embedding of the relation path in the KG connecting the entities.
“we expect the KG embedding s kg to reflect the KG embedding of the relation path in KG connecting these entities”
The paper relies on this without support.
There is a high correlation between relation linking and KBQA.
“Due to the high correlation between RL and KBQA”
The paper relies on this without support.
Paraphrases can be considered as prior knowledge about the diverse meanings of natural language.
“These paraphrases can be considered as prior knowledge about the diverse meanings of NL.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Due to DBpedia's organizational structure, namespaces dbo and dbp have different representations of the same relations.
“Due to the organizational structure of DBpedia, namespaces dbo and dbp have different representations of the same relations.”
Cites
Jakubův, J., Chvalovský, K., Goertzel, Z., et al. (2023) · DROPS (Schloss Dagstuhl – Leibniz Center for Informatics) · doi:10.4230/lipics.itp.2023.19 · Cited by 76,648 · see citing works
BERT: Pre-training of Deep Bidirectional Transformers for Language Understanding
Devlin, J., Chang, M.-W., Lee, K., & Toutanova, K. (2019) · Proceedings of the 2019 Conference of the North American Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics: Human Language Technologies, Volume 1 (Long and Short Papers) · doi:10.18653/v1/n19-1423 · Cited by 48,293 · see citing works
Transformers: State-of-the-Art Natural Language Processing
Wolf, T., Debut, L., Sanh, V., Chaumond, J., Delangue, C., Moi, A., Cistac, P., Rault, T., Louf, R., Funtowicz, M., et al. (2020) · Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing: System Demonstrations · doi:10.18653/v1/2020.emnlp-demos.6 · Cited by 8,741 · see citing works
(2013) · Cited by 5,726 · see citing works
Freebase: a collaboratively created graph database for structuring human knowledge
Bollacker, K., Evans, C., Paritosh, P., Sturge, T., & Taylor, J. (2008) · Proceedings of the 2008 ACM SIGMOD international conference on Management of data · doi:10.1145/1376616.1376746 · Cited by 4,852 · see citing works
DBpedia: A Nucleus for a Web of Open Data
Auer, S., Bizer, C., Kobilarov, G., Lehmann, J., Richard Cyganiak, A., & Ives, Z. G. (2007) · Lecture notes in computer science · doi:10.1007/978-3-540-76298-0_52 · Cited by 4,847 · see citing works
Vrandečić, D., & Krötzsch, M. (2014) · Communications of the ACM · doi:10.1145/2629489 · Cited by 3,367 · see citing works
Knowledge Graph Embedding: A Survey of Approaches and Applications
Wang, Q., Mao, Z., Wang, B., & Guo, L. (2017) · IEEE Transactions on Knowledge and Data Engineering · doi:10.1109/tkde.2017.2754499 · Cited by 2,654 · see citing works
RotatE: Knowledge Graph Embedding by Relational Rotation in Complex Space
Sun, Z., Deng, Z.-H., Nie, J.-Y., & Tang, J. (2019) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.1902.10197 · Cited by 1,414 · see citing works
Ganitkevitch, J., Durme, B. V., & Callison-Burch, C. (2013) · Cited by 659 · see citing works
Relational retrieval using a combination of path-constrained random walks
Lao, N., & Cohen, W. W. (2010) · Machine Learning · doi:10.1007/s10994-010-5205-8 · Cited by 616 · see citing works
Knowledge Graph Embedding Based Question Answering
Huang, X. X., Zhang, J., Li, D., & Li, P. (2019) · ACM International Conference on Web Search and Data Mining (WSDM) · doi:10.1145/3289600.3290956 · Cited by 598 · see citing works
(2020) · doi:10.18653/v1/2020.acl-main.412 · Cited by 542 · see citing works
Large-scale Simple Question Answering with Memory Networks
Bordes, A., Usunier, N., Chopra, S., & Weston, J. (2015) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.1506.02075 · Cited by 528 · see citing works
The Web as a Knowledge-Base for Answering Complex Questions
Talmor, A., & Berant, J. (2018) · Proceedings of the 2018 Conference of the North American Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics: Human Language Technologies, Volume 1 (Long Papers) · doi:10.18653/v1/n18-1059 · Cited by 520 · see citing works
Random Walk Inference and Learning in A Large Scale Knowledge Base
Lao, N., Mitchell, T. M., & Cohen, W. W. (2018) · Figshare · doi:10.1184/r1/6476267 · Cited by 479 · see citing works
Das, R., Dhuliawala, S., Zaheer, M., Vilnis, L., Durugkar, I., Krishnamurthy, A., Smola, A. J., & McCallum, A. (2017) · arXiv (Cornell University) · doi:10.48550/arxiv.1711.05851 · Cited by 479 · see citing works
(2012) · MPG.PuRe (Max Planck Society) · Cited by 360 · see citing works
Answering Natural Language Questions by Subgraph Matching over Knowledge Graphs
Hu, S., Zou, L., Yu, J. X., et al. (2017) · IEEE Transactions on Knowledge and Data Engineering · doi:10.1109/tkde.2017.2766634 · Cited by 271 · see citing works
LC-QuAD: A Corpus for Complex Question Answering over Knowledge Graphs
Trivedi, P., Maheshwari, G., Dubey, M., & Lehmann, J. (2017) · Lecture Notes in Computer Science · doi:10.1007/978-3-319-68204-4_22 · Cited by 261 · see citing works
Incorporating Vector Space Similarity in Random Walk Inference over Knowledge Bases
Gardner, M., Talukdar, P., Krishnamurthy, J., & Mitchell, T. (2014) · Proceedings of the 2014 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing (EMNLP) · doi:10.3115/v1/d14-1044 · Cited by 189 · see citing works
Stepwise Reasoning for Multi-Relation Question Answering over Knowledge Graph with Weak Supervision
Qiu, Y., Wang, Y., Jin, X., et al. (2020) · doi:10.1145/3336191.3371812 · Cited by 164 · see citing works
AMR Parsing as Sequence-to-Graph Transduction
Zhang, S., Ma, X., Duh, K., & Durme, B. V. (2019) · Proceedings of the conference - Association for Computational Linguistics. Meeting · doi:10.18653/v1/p19-1009 · Cited by 119 · see citing works
EARL: Joint Entity and Relation Linking for Question Answering over Knowledge Graphs
Dubey, M., Banerjee, D., Chaudhuri, D., & Lehmann, J. (2018) · Lecture Notes in Computer Science · doi:10.1007/978-3-030-00671-6_7 · Cited by 111 · see citing works
Why Reinvent the Wheel: Let's Build Question Answering Systems Together
Singh, K., Lange, C., Vidal, M. E., Lehmann, J., Auer, S., Radhakrishna, A. S., Both, A., Shekarpour, S., Lytra, I., Usbeck, R., et al. (2018) · Proceedings of the 2018 World Wide Web Conference on World Wide Web - WWW '18 · doi:10.1145/3178876.3186023 · Cited by 102 · see citing works
Old is Gold: Linguistic Driven Approach for Entity and Relation Linking of Short Text
Sakor, A., Onando Mulang’, I., Singh, K., Shekarpour, S., Esther Vidal, M., Lehmann, J., & Auer, S. (2019) · Proceedings of the 2019 Conference of the North American Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics: Human Language Technologies, Volume 1 (Long and Short Papers) · doi:10.18653/v1/n19-1243 · Cited by 86 · see citing works
Sakor, A., Singh, K., Patel, A., et al. (2020) · Proceedings of the ... ACM International Conference on Information & Knowledge Management · doi:10.1145/3340531.3412777 · Cited by 85 · see citing works
Leveraging Abstract Meaning Representation for Knowledge Base Question Answering
Kapanipathi, P., Abdelaziz, I., Ravishankar, S., Roukos, S., Gray, A., Astudillo, R. F., Chang, M., Cornelio, C., Dana, S., Fokoue, A., et al. (2021) · Findings of the Association for Computational Linguistics: ACL (Findings of ACL) · doi:10.18653/v1/2021.findings-acl.339 · Cited by 85 · see citing works
Lin, X., Li, H., Xin, H., et al. (2020) · Proceedings of the VLDB Endowment · doi:10.14778/3384345.3384352 · Cited by 52 · see citing works
Context-aware Path Ranking for Knowledge Base Completion
Mazumder, S., & Liu, B. (2017) · Proceedings of the Twenty-Sixth International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence · doi:10.24963/ijcai.2017/166 · Cited by 35 · see citing works
Matching Natural Language Relations to Knowledge Graph Properties for Question Answering
Mulang, I. O., Singh, K., & Orlandi, F. (2017) · International Conference on Semantic Systems · doi:10.1145/3132218.3132229 · Cited by 35 · see citing works
A Semantics-aware Transformer Model of Relation Linking for Knowledge Base Question Answering
Naseem, T., Ravishankar, S., Mihindukulasooriya, N., Abdelaziz, I., Lee, Y.-S., Kapanipathi, P., Roukos, S., Gliozzo, A., & Gray, A. (2021) · Proceedings of the 59th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics and the 11th International Joint Conference on Natural Language Processing (Volume 2: Short Papers) · doi:10.18653/v1/2021.acl-short.34 · Cited by 29 · see citing works
A unified framework for approximate dictionary-based entity extraction
Deng, D., Li, G., Feng, J., et al. (2014) · The VLDB Journal · doi:10.1007/s00778-014-0367-9 · Cited by 25 · see citing works
(2018) · International Conference on Computational Linguistics · Cited by 25 · see citing works
Capturing Knowledge in Semantically-typed Relational Patterns to Enhance Relation Linking
Singh, K., Mulang', I. O., Lytra, I., Jaradeh, M. Y., Sakor, A., Vidal, M.-E., Lange, C., & Auer, S. (2017) · Proceedings of the Knowledge Capture Conference · doi:10.1145/3148011.3148031 · Cited by 24 · see citing works
Leveraging Semantic Parsing for Relation Linking over Knowledge Bases
Mihindukulasooriya, N., Rossiello, G., Kapanipathi, P., Abdelaziz, I., Ravishankar, S., Yu, M., Gliozzo, A., Roukos, S., & Gray, A. (2020) · Lecture Notes in Computer Science · doi:10.1007/978-3-030-62419-4_23 · Cited by 24 · see citing works
Entity Enabled Relation Linking
Pan, J. Z., Zhang, M., Singh, K., Harmelen, F. V., Gu, J., & Zhang, Z. (2019) · Lecture Notes in Computer Science · doi:10.1007/978-3-030-30793-6_30 · Cited by 20 · see citing works
Modeling Paths for Explainable Knowledge Base Completion
Stadelmaier, J., & Padó, S. (2019) · Proceedings of the 2019 ACL Workshop BlackboxNLP: Analyzing and Interpreting Neural Networks for NLP · doi:10.18653/v1/w19-4816 · Cited by 12 · see citing works
The Value of Paraphrase for Knowledge Base Predicates
Xue, B., Hu, S., Zou, L., & Cheng, J. (2020) · Proceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence · doi:10.1609/aaai.v34i05.6475 · Cited by 4 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Research works printed but not linked: 2
- Ricardo Usbeck, Ria Hari Gusmita, Axel- Cyrille Ngonga Ngomo, and Muhammad Saleem. 2018. 9th challenge on question answering over linked data (QALD-9) (invited paper). In Semdeep/NLIWoD@ISWC, pages 58-64.
- Ashish Vaswani, Noam Shazeer, Niki Parmar, Jakob Uszkoreit, Llion Jones, Aidan N. Gomez, Lukasz Kaiser, and Illia Polosukhin. 2017. Attention is all you need. In NIPS, pages 5998-6008.
Cited by
Sorted by citations
A survey on complex factual question answering
Zhang, L., Zhang, J., Ke, X., Li, H., Huang, X., Shao, Z., Cao, S., & Lv, X. (2022) · AI Open · doi:10.1016/j.aiopen.2022.12.003 · Cited by 20 · see citing works
A Novel Joint Training Model for Knowledge Base Question Answering
Wang, S., & Qin, B. (2023) · IEEE/ACM Transactions on Audio Speech and Language Processing · doi:10.1109/taslp.2023.3336526 · Cited by 13 · see citing works
Triple alignment-enhanced complex question answering over knowledge bases
Wang, D., Zhou, S., Huang, J., & Ni, X. (2024) · Neurocomputing · doi:10.1016/j.neucom.2024.127709 · Cited by 4 · see citing works
Self-citationDai, Y., Zhang, B., & Wang, S. (2024) · IEEE Transactions on Computational Biology and Bioinformatics · doi:10.1109/tcbb.2024.3412174 · Cited by 2 · see citing works
EDIRL: An effective relation linking approach for multihop question answering over knowledge graphs
Suneera, C. M., & Prakash, J. (2026) · International Journal of Data Science and Analytics · doi:10.1007/s41060-026-01289-1
- Authors
- Zhao, Y., Huang, J., Hu, W., Chen, Q., Qiu, X., Huo, C., & Ren, W.
- Affiliations
- Nanjing University (CN)
- Alibaba Group (China) (CN)
- Venue
- Findings of the Association for Computational Linguistics: ACL 2022
- Published
- 2022
- Pages
- 3956-3968
- OpenAlex
- W4285254449
- Semantic Scholar
- 81c7cf412be996953eefd04fd29da6558bf0be75
- Cited by
- 5
- References
- 39
- Citations by year
- 2026: 1 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 1
- FWCI
- 0.55
- Type
- conference paper
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
- doi.org
- Licence
- cc-by
- Locations
- Findings of the Association for Computational Linguistics: ACL 2022 (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- Funders
- National Natural Science Foundation of China (61872172)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Topic Modeling
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Advanced Graph Neural Networks
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Natural Language Processing Techniques
- Keywords
- knowledge base question answering, knowledge graphs, path ranking, word embeddings, knowledge graph embedding, gated attention mechanism
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Claims read by deepseek-v4.1-flash under definition version 3 (extract-v3) on 2026-10-23.
Classified by jev-1.13-20260917 (gold-guideline-v0.2) on 2026-10-23.
Cited sources are checked by gpt-6-sol.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review