CoChat
Sign Up
PreprintCited by 91Advanced Graph Neural NetworksTopic ModelingSemantic Web and Ontologies

On the representation and embedding of knowledge bases beyond binary relations

Open access
Wen, Jianfeng, Li, Jianxin, Mao, Yongyi, Chen, Shini, Zhang, Richong·2016·arXiv
DOI 10.48550/arxiv.1604.08642arXiv 1604.08642
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

The models developed to date for knowledge base embedding are all based on the assumption that the relations contained in knowledge bases are binary. For the training and testing of these embedding models, multi-fold (or n-ary) relational data are converted to triples (e.g., in FB15K dataset) and interpreted as instances of binary relations. This paper presents a canonical representation of knowledge bases containing multi-fold relations. We show that the existing embedding models on the popular FB15K datasets correspond to a sub-optimal modelling framework, resulting in a loss of structural information. We advocate a novel modelling framework, which models multi-fold relations directly using this canonical representation. Using this framework, the existing TransH model is generalized to a new model, m-TransH. We demonstrate experimentally that m-TransH outperforms TransH by a large margin, thereby establishing a new state of the art.

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 · 10.48550/arxiv.1604.08642

Cites

Statistics

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

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • 61% of FreeBase relations are beyond-binary, and corresponding hyperedges involve more than 1/3rd of FreeBase entities.

    “as noted by Fatemi et al . [15] and Wen et al. [68], 61% of the FreeBase relations are beyond-binary, and the corresponding hyperedges involve more than 1/3rd of the FreeBase entities.”

    From Knowledge Graph Embedding for Link Prediction (2021) · cites this paper as Wen et al. [68]

    The Introduction (p. 1) says that more than one-third of Freebase entities participate in non-binary relations, supporting the entity portion of the claim. Our copy does not report that 61% of Freebase relations are beyond-binary; a search for “61%” found no such statistic. (LLM, conf=0.88)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

  • The conversion dubbed Star-to-Clique (S2C) is irreversible.

    “It has been pointed out that this conversion, dubbed 'Star-to-Clique' (S2C), is irreversible [68].”

    From Knowledge Graph Embedding for Link Prediction (2021) · cites this paper as [68]

Self-check

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

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

Cites

No references could be resolved yet.

Research works printed but not linked: 24

  1. [Angeli and Manning, 2013] Gabor Angeli and Christopher D Manning. Philosophers are mortal: Inferring the truth of unseen facts. In CoNLL , pages 133-142, 2013.
  2. [Auer et al. , 2007] S¨ oren Auer, Christian Bizer, Georgi Kobilarov, Jens Lehmann, Richard Cyganiak, and Zachary Ives. Dbpedia: A nucleus for a web of open data . Springer, 2007.
  3. [Baader et al. , 2007] Franz Baader, Bernhard Ganter, Baris Sertkaya, and Ulrike Sattler. Completing description logic knowledge bases using formal concept analysis. In IJCAI , volume 7, pages 230-235, 2007.
  4. [Bollacker et al. , 2008] Kurt Bollacker, Colin Evans, Praveen Paritosh, Tim Sturge, and Jamie Taylor. Freebase: a collaboratively created graph database for structuring human knowledge. In Proceedings of the 2008 ACM SIGMOD international conference on Management of data , pages 1247-1250. ACM, 2008.
  5. [Bordes et al. , 2011] Antoine Bordes, Jason Weston, Ronan Collobert, and Yoshua Bengio. Learning structured embeddings of knowledge bases. In Conference on Artificial Intelligence , number EPFL-CONF-192344, 2011.
  6. [Bordes et al. , 2013] Antoine Bordes, Nicolas Usunier, Alberto Garcia-Duran, Jason Weston, and Oksana Yakhnenko. Translating embeddings for modeling multi-relational data. In Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems , pages 2787-2795, 2013.
  7. [Bordes et al. , 2014a] Antoine Bordes, Sumit Chopra, and Jason Weston. Question answering with subgraph embeddings. arXiv preprint arXiv:1406.3676 , 2014. · arXiv
  8. [Bordes et al. , 2014b] Antoine Bordes, Xavier Glorot, Jason Weston, and Yoshua Bengio. A semantic matching energy function for learning with multi-relational data. Machine Learning , 94(2):233-259, 2014.
  9. [Codd, 1970] Edgar F Codd. A relational model of data for large shared data banks. Communications of the ACM , 13(6):377-387, 1970.
  10. [Glorot et al. , 2011] Xavier Glorot, Antoine Bordes, and Yoshua Bengio. Deep sparse rectifier neural networks. In International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics , pages 315-323, 2011.
  11. [Grewe, 2010] N Grewe. A generic reification strategy for n-ary relations in dl. In H. Herre et al., editors, Proceedings of the 2nd workshop of the GI-Fachgruppe 'Ontologien in Biomedizin und Lebenswissenschaften' (OBML) : Mannheim, Germany , 2010.
  12. [Hungerford, 2003] Thomas Hungerford. Algebra . Springer, eighth edition, 2003.
  13. [Krieger and Willms, 2015] Hans-Ulrich Krieger and Christian Willms. Extending owl ontologies by cartesian types to represent n-ary relations in natural language. In Language and Ontologies 2015. Language and Ontologies, located at 11th International Conference on Computational Semantics, April 14, London, United Kingdom . o.A., 4 2015.
  14. [Lin et al. , 2015a] Yankai Lin, Zhiyuan Liu, and Maosong Sun. Modeling relation paths for representation learning of knowledge bases. arXiv preprint arXiv:1506.00379 , 2015. · arXiv
  15. [Lin et al. , 2015b] Yankai Lin, Zhiyuan Liu, Maosong Sun, Yang Liu, and Xuan Zhu. Learning entity and relation embeddings for knowledge graph completion. In Proceedings of AAAI , 2015.
  16. [Marin et al. , 2014] Alex Marin, Roman Holenstein, Ruhi Sarikaya, and Mari Ostendorf. Learning phrase patterns for text classification using a knowledge graph and unlabeled data. In Fifteenth Annual Conference of the International Speech Communication Association , 2014.
  17. [Nguyen et al. , 2014] Vinh Nguyen, Olivier Bodenreider, and Amit Sheth. Don't like rdf reification?: Making statements about statements using singleton property. In Proceedings of the 23rd International Conference on World Wide Web , WWW '14, pages 759-770, New York, NY, USA, 2014. ACM.
  18. [Nickel et al. , 2015] Maximilian Nickel, Kevin Murphy, Volker Tresp, and Evgeniy Gabrilovich. A review of relational machine learning for knowledge graphs: From multi-relational link prediction to automated knowledge graph construction. arXiv preprint arXiv:1503.00759 , 2015. · arXiv
  19. [Rouces et al. , 2015] Jacobo Rouces, Gerard de Melo, and Katja Hose. Framebase: Representing n-ary relations using semantic frames. In The Semantic Web. Latest Advances and New Domains , pages 505-521. Springer, 2015.
  20. [Socher et al. , 2013] Richard Socher, Danqi Chen, Christopher D Manning, and Andrew Ng. Reasoning with neural tensor networks for knowledge base completion. In Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems , pages 926-934, 2013.
  21. [Suchanek et al. , 2007] Fabian M Suchanek, Gjergji Kasneci, and Gerhard Weikum. Yago: a core of semantic knowledge. In Proceedings of the 16th international conference on World Wide Web , pages 697-706. ACM, 2007.
  22. [Wang et al. , 2014] Zhen Wang, Jianwen Zhang, Jianlin Feng, and Zheng Chen. Knowledge graph embedding by translating on hyperplanes. In Proceedings of the TwentyEighth AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence , pages 1112-1119. Citeseer, 2014.
  23. [Xiong and Callan, 2015a] Chenyan Xiong and Jamie Callan. Esdrank: Connecting query and documents through external semi-structured data. In Proceedings of the 24th ACM International on Conference on Information and Knowledge Management , CIKM '15, pages 951-960, New York, NY, USA, 2015. ACM.
  24. [Xiong and Callan, 2015b] Chenyan Xiong and Jamie Callan. Query expansion with Freebase. In Proceedings of the Fifth ACM International Conference on the Theory of Information Retrieval . ACM, 2015.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Wen, J., Li, J., Mao, Y., Chen, S., & Zhang, R.
Affiliations
  • State Key Laboratory of Software Development Environment (CN)
  • University of Ottawa (CA)
  • Beihang University (CN)
ORCID
Venue
arXiv
Publisher
arXiv
Published
2016
Pages
1300-1307
ISSN
2331-8422 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.48550/arxiv.1604.08642
arXiv
1604.08642
OpenAlex
W2343431530
Cited by
91
References
0
Citations by year
2025: 11 · 2024: 9 · 2023: 28 · 2022: 15 · 2021: 9 · 2020: 8 · 2019: 6 · 2018: 4 · 2012: 1
Type
posted content
Language
en
Open access
Licence
arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
Locations
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Advanced Graph Neural Networks
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Topic Modeling
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Semantic Web and Ontologies
Keywords
knowledge base embedding, n-ary relations, TransH

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