Cited by 4Semantic Web and OntologiesLogic, Reasoning, and KnowledgeBayesian Modeling and Causal Inference

The DOI matches its DataCite record; the references it cites are not checked yet.

Time-Aware Probabilistic Knowledge Graphs

Open access
Chekol, Melisachew Wudage, Stuckenschmidt, Heiner·2019·Schloss Dagstuhl – Leibniz-Zentrum für Informatik

Abstract

The emergence of open information extraction as a tool for constructing and expanding knowledge graphs has aided the growth of temporal data, for instance, YAGO, NELL and Wikidata. While YAGO and Wikidata maintain the valid time of facts, NELL records the time point at which a fact is retrieved from some Web corpora. Collectively, these knowledge graphs (KG) store facts extracted from Wikipedia and other sources. Due to the imprecise nature of the extraction tools that are used to build and expand KG, such as NELL, the facts in the KG are weighted (a confidence value representing the correctness of a fact). Additionally, NELL can be considered as a transaction time KG because every fact is associated with extraction date. On the other hand, YAGO and Wikidata use the valid time model because they maintain facts together with their validity time (temporal scope). In this paper, we propose a bitemporal model (that combines transaction and valid time models) for maintaining and querying bitemporal probabilistic knowledge graphs. We study coalescing and scalability of marginal and MAP inference. Moreover, we show that complexity of reasoning tasks in atemporal probabilistic KG carry over to the bitemporal setting. Finally, we report our evaluation results of the proposed model.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

DataCite · 10.4230/lipics.time.2019.8

Cites

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

Cited by 4

Metadata

Authors
Chekol, M. W., & Stuckenschmidt, H.
Affiliations
University of Mannheim (DE)
Venue
Schloss Dagstuhl – Leibniz-Zentrum für Informatik
Publisher
Schloss Dagstuhl – Leibniz-Zentrum für Informatik
Published
2019
Pages
17
OpenAlex
W2982621420
Cited by
4
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 1
FWCI
0.19
Type
conference paper
Language
en
Locations
  • MADOC (University of Mannheim) (acceptedVersion, cc-by)
  • DROPS (Schloss Dagstuhl – Leibniz Center for Informatics) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • Leibniz international proceedings in informatics (cc-by)
  • International Symposium on Temporal Representation and Reasoning
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Semantic Web and Ontologies
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Logic, Reasoning, and Knowledge
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Bayesian Modeling and Causal Inference
Keywords
transaction time, valid time, open information extraction, Nell, YAGO, Wikidata, marginal inference, MAP inference, reasoning complexity, temporal data

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.

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