The DOI matches its DataCite record; 56 of the 69 references it cites were found in a registry or an index; 16 of the 26 sources its claims cite were checked for support.
SimplE Embedding for Link Prediction in Knowledge Graphs
Open accessAbstract
Knowledge graphs contain knowledge about the world and provide a structured representation of this knowledge. Current knowledge graphs contain only a small subset of what is true in the world. Link prediction approaches aim at predicting new links for a knowledge graph given the existing links among the entities. Tensor factorization approaches have proved promising for such link prediction problems. Proposed in 1927, Canonical Polyadic (CP) decomposition is among the first tensor factorization approaches. CP generally performs poorly for link prediction as it learns two independent embedding vectors for each entity, whereas they are really tied. We present a simple enhancement of CP (which we call SimplE) to allow the two embeddings of each entity to be learned dependently. The complexity of SimplE grows linearly with the size of embeddings. The embeddings learned through SimplE are interpretable, and certain types of background knowledge can be incorporated into these embeddings through weight tying. We prove SimplE is fully expressive and derive a bound on the size of its embeddings for full expressivity. We show empirically that, despite its simplicity, SimplE outperforms several state-of-the-art tensor factorization techniques. SimplE's code is available on GitHub at https://github.com/Mehran-k/SimplE.
Overview
AI snapshot
Written from the paper’s full text.
TL;DR
SimplE is a simple bilinear tensor-factorization model for knowledge graph link prediction that ties the two CP embeddings of each entity via inverse relations, making them learned dependently while retaining linear complexity. It is proved fully expressive and empirically matches or outperforms ComplEx and other baselines on WN18 and FB15k, with large gains when background-knowledge rules are incorporated by weight tying.
Key findings
- SimplE is fully expressive: Proposition 1 gives an embedding size of min(|E|·|R|, γ+1) for any ground truth with γ true facts; it addresses CP’s independent head/tail embeddings by averaging CP scores for (e_i, r, e_j) and (e_j, r^{-1}, e_i).
- On WN18, SimplE achieves filtered MRR 0.942, raw MRR 0.588, and Hit@1/3/10 0.939/0.944/0.947; on FB15k, filtered MRR 0.727, raw MRR 0.239, and Hit@1/3/10 0.660/0.773/0.838. It outperforms ComplEx on FB15k filtered MRR (0.727 vs. 0.692) and is comparable on WN18 (0.942 vs. 0.941).
- Background knowledge via weight tying: after removing redundant WN18 training triples (approximately 141K to 90K, about 36% reduction), filtered MRR was 0.221 for SimplE-ignr, 0.384 for SimplE, and 0.275 for ComplEx without rules; with tied rules, SimplE-ignr-bk reached 0.772 and SimplE-bk 0.776.
- Complexity: SimplE and SimplE-ignr are O(d); per triple, SimplE-ignr uses 1 multiplication between three vectors, SimplE uses 2, and ComplEx uses 4, reducing computations by factors of 4 and 2 versus ComplEx. FSTransE is shown not fully expressive with restrictions R1–R3.
Methods
- Model: tensor factorization based on CP; each entity has head h_e and tail t_e vectors, each relation has v_r and v_{r^{-1}}; score for (e_i, r, e_j) is 1/2(〈h_ei, v_r, t_ej〉 + 〈h_ej, v_{r^{-1}}, t_ei〉). SimplE-ignr updates both scores during training but tests only 〈h_ei, v_r, t_ej〉.
- Training/evaluation: SGD with minibatches, negative sampling by corrupting head or tail (Bordes et al. procedure), and L2-regularized negative log-likelihood with softplus. Datasets: WN18 (40,943 entities, 18 relations, 141,442 train, 5,000 validation, 5,000 test triples) and FB15k (14,951 entities, 1,345 relations, 483,142 train, 50,000 validation, 59,071 test triples). Metrics: filtered/raw MRR and Hit@k; baselines include CP, TransE, TransR, DistMult, NTN, STransE, ER-MLP, and ComplEx.
- Hyperparameters: TensorFlow implementation; embedding size 200; max iterations 1000; batch size 100; learning rate 0.1 for WN18 and 0.05 for FB15k; adagrad; 1 negative per positive for WN18 and 10 for FB15k. Best λ values: SimplE-ignr WN18 0.001, FB15k 0.03; SimplE WN18 0.03, FB15k 0.1.
Limitations
- The paper does not have a dedicated limitations section; it lists future improvements (ensembles, 1-N scoring, combining with logic, incorporating other background knowledge) and notes that the background-knowledge experiment provides an upper bound on how much such knowledge can improve SimplE.
- Evident from the text: empirical evaluation is limited to WN18 and FB15k, and the background-knowledge experiment is only on WN18 after removing redundant triples, so those gains may not generalize.
- Evident from the text: no variance, confidence intervals, or significance tests are reported; hyperparameters were tuned on validation sets, and results appear to be single runs as described.
Model-written summary. Check it against the paper before relying on it.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
16 of 26 cited sources checked · 12 supported · 0 flagged · accuracy not yet measured
Every source the paper cites for this claim was checked and supports it.
In the paper
“It has been shown in [40] that ComplEx is fully expressive with embeddings of length at most |E| · |R| .”
What the sources say
- Supportedcites [40] [40] Théo Trouillon, Christopher R Dance, Johannes Welbl, Sebastian Riedel, Éric Gaussier, and Guillaume Bouchard. Knowledge graph completion via complex tensor factorization. arXiv preprint arXiv:1702.06879 , 2017. - source
Section 3.2 (p. 14), Theorem 4, shows that the ComplEx factorization exists for any set of relation matrices using dimension at most nm. The paper identifies n as the number of entities and m as the number of relations, giving the claimed |E|·|R| bound. (LLM, conf=0.94)
Strength:boosted· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes? Load-bearing: unclear✓ Based: passes- Supported
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“As described in [3], to scale to the size of the current KGs and keep up with their growth, a relational model must have a linear time and memory complexity.”
What the sources say
- Partly supportedcites [3] [3] Antoine Bordes, Nicolas Usunier, Alberto Garcia-Duran, Jason Weston, and Oksana Yakhnenko. Irreflexive and hierarchical relations as translations. arXiv preprint arXiv:1304.7158 , 2013. - sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Introduction (p. 1) describes the large size of knowledge bases, and Related work (p. 2) discusses which models scale to many entities and relation types. Neither passage says that linear time and memory complexity is necessary to scale or keep up with growth. (LLM, conf=0.83)
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passes- Partly supported
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“Corollary 1. Other variants of translational approaches such as TransE, FTransE, STransE, TransH [41], and TransR [22] also have the restrictions mentioned in Proposition 2.”
What the sources say
- Supportedcites [41] [41] Zhen Wang, Jianwen Zhang, Jianlin Feng, and Zheng Chen. Knowledge graph embedding by translating on hyperplanes. In AAAI , pages 1112-1119, 2014. - source
The citation [41] is attached specifically to TransH in the list of translational approaches. The ‘Translating on Hyperplanes (TransH)’ section (p. 3) introduces and names that model, so the paper supports this identification citation; it need not establish the citing authors’ Corollary 1. (LLM, conf=0.94)
- Partly supportedcites [22] [22] Yankai Lin, Zhiyuan Liu, Maosong Sun, Yang Liu, and Xuan Zhu. Learning entity and relation embeddings for knowledge graph completion. In AAAI , pages 2181-2187, 2015. - sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The TransR section (p. 3) identifies TransR as a translational model, and the Cluster-based TransR section (p. 3) says it shares a limitation with TransE and TransH: one relation vector may not fit diverse entity pairs. Our copy does not identify the restrictions in the citing paper’s Proposition 2, so it cannot establish that TransR has those specific restrictions. (LLM, conf=0.76)
Load-bearingStrength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passes- Rests on an assumption: For a triple (h,r,t) to hold in FSTransE, we should ideally have p_rh + v_r = α q_rt for some α.
- Supported
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“We prove that many existing translational approaches (see e.g., [4, 17, 41, 26]) are not fully expressive and we identify severe restrictions on what they can represent.”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [4] [4] Antoine Bordes, Nicolas Usunier, Alberto Garcia-Duran, Jason Weston, and Oksana Yakhnenko. Translating embeddings for modeling multi-relational data. In NIPS , pages 2787-2795, 2013. -
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not matchedcites [17] [17] Guoliang Ji, Shizhu He, Liheng Xu, Kang Liu, and Jun Zhao. Knowledge graph embedding via dynamic mapping matrix. In ACL (1) , pages 687-696, 2015. -
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Partly supportedcites [41] [41] Zhen Wang, Jianwen Zhang, Jianlin Feng, and Zheng Chen. Knowledge graph embedding by translating on hyperplanes. In AAAI , pages 1112-1119, 2014. - sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The section “Relations’ Mapping Properties in Embedding” (p. 2) identifies representational restrictions of TransE for reflexive and one-to-many/many-to-one relations. This supports the general concern about limited expressiveness, but the cited paper analyzes TransE specifically; it does not establish that many translational approaches are not fully expressive. (LLM, conf=0.85)
- Not matchedcites [26] [26] Dat Quoc Nguyen, Kairit Sirts, Lizhen Qu, and Mark Johnson. Stranse: a novel embedding model of entities and relationships in knowledge bases. In NAACL-HLT , 2016. -
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
Load-bearingStrength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passes- Not matched
Every source the paper cites for this claim was checked and supports it.
In the paper
“Wang et al. [44] prove that TransE is not fully expressive.”
What the sources say
- Supportedcites [44] [44] Yanjie Wang, Rainer Gemulla, and Hui Li. On multi-relational link prediction with bilinear models. AAAI , 2018. - source
Section 3.3 (p. 4) states and proves that some Boolean tensors cannot be represented by any consistent TransE ranking. Section 3.1 (p. 3) also proves that some RESCAL models cannot be expressed by TransE, regardless of its size. These results support the claim that TransE is not fully expressive. (LLM, conf=0.94)
Load-bearingStrength:boosted· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passes- Supported
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“While inverse of relations has been used for other purposes (see e.g., [20, 21, 6]), using them to address the independence of the entity vectors in CP is a novel contribution.”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [20] [20] Ni Lao and William W Cohen. Relational retrieval using a combination of path-constrained random walks. Machine learning , 81(1):53-67, 2010. -
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Supportedcites [21] [21] Yankai Lin, Zhiyuan Liu, Huanbo Luan, Maosong Sun, Siwei Rao, and Song Liu. Modeling relation paths for representation learning of knowledge bases. EMNLP , 2015. - source
The citation supports the sentence’s background clause: inverse relations had been used for other purposes. In §2.5, “Reverse Relation Addition,” the paper adds reverse relations so its model can use relation paths that would otherwise run against a relation’s direction. The sentence’s claim of novelty in CP is the citing authors’ own contribution, not a claim attributed to this source. (LLM, conf=0.92)
- Not matchedcites [6] [6] Rajarshi Das, Shehzaad Dhuliawala, Manzil Zaheer, Luke Vilnis, Ishan Durugkar, Akshay Krishnamurthy, Alex Smola, and Andrew McCallum. Go for a walk and arrive at the answer: Reasoning over paths in knowledge bases using reinforcement learning. NIPS Workshop on AKBC , 2017. -
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passes- Not matched
Every source the paper cites for this claim was checked and supports it.
In the paper
“CP generally performs poorly for link prediction as it learns two independent embedding vectors for each entity, whereas they are really tied.”
- Also stated in: § 1 Introduction · p. 2 · plain
“This independence has caused CP to perform poorly for KG completion [40].”
What the sources say
- Supportedcites [40] [40] Théo Trouillon, Christopher R Dance, Johannes Welbl, Sebastian Riedel, Éric Gaussier, and Guillaume Bouchard. Knowledge graph completion via complex tensor factorization. arXiv preprint arXiv:1702.06879 , 2017. - source
The Introduction (p. 2) says CP gives each entity two different embeddings and consequently has low prediction performance. The Results (p. 24) report that CP lags on both link-prediction benchmarks; the paper also notes an exception on fully observed data sets (p. 20), consistent with the claim’s 'generally' qualifier. (LLM, conf=0.93)
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passes- Also stated in: § 1 Introduction · p. 2 · plain
Every source the paper cites for this claim was checked and supports it.
In the paper
“We also show that the function used in ComplEx [39, 40], a state-of-the-art approach for link prediction, involves redundant computations.”
What the sources say
- Supportedcites [39] [39] Théo Trouillon, Johannes Welbl, Sebastian Riedel, Éric Gaussier, and Guillaume Bouchard. Complex embeddings for simple link prediction. In ICML , pages 2071-2080, 2016. - source
The citation identifies ComplEx, not the citing authors’ own finding about redundant computations. Section 4 (p. 5) names the model ComplEx, and Section 4.3 (p. 6) reports its strong link-prediction results against the compared models. (LLM, conf=0.91)
- Supportedcites [40] [40] Théo Trouillon, Christopher R Dance, Johannes Welbl, Sebastian Riedel, Éric Gaussier, and Guillaume Bouchard. Knowledge graph completion via complex tensor factorization. arXiv preprint arXiv:1702.06879 , 2017. - source
The citation identifies ComplEx and its scoring function, which the cited paper defines in Section 3.1 (p. 12). The statement that the function involves redundant computations is introduced as something the citing authors show, not as a finding attributed to this source. (LLM, conf=0.89)
Strength:boosted· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes? Load-bearing: unclear✓ Based: passes- Supported
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“R3 : If entity e 1 has relation r with every entity in ∆ ⊂ E and entity e 2 has relation r with one of the entities in ∆ , then e 2 must have the relation r with every entity in ∆ .”
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passes- Rests on an assumption: For a triple (h,r,t) to hold in FSTransE, we should ideally have p_rh + v_r = α q_rt for some α.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Proposition 4. Let r be a relation such that for any two entities e i and e j we have ( e i , r , e j ) ∈ ζ ⇐⇒ ( e j , r , e i ) ∈ ζ ′ (i.e. r is anti-symmetric). This property of r can be encoded into SimplE by tying the parameters v r -1 to the negative of v r .”
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passes
- Probably not a substantial claim. 21
- It may state two separate claims as one. 18
Every source the paper cites for this claim was checked and supports it.
In the paper
“Since DistMult does not distinguish between head and tail entities, it can only model symmetric relations.”
What the sources say
- Supportedcites [46] [46] Bishan Yang, Wen-tau Yih, Xiaodong He, Jianfeng Gao, and Li Deng. Embedding entities and relations for learning and inference in knowledge bases. ICLR , 2015. - source
Section 4.1 (p. 5) identifies DistMult as BILINEAR-DIAG and describes its score as a weighted element-wise dot product of the two entity vectors. Section 3.2 (p. 4) specifies a diagonal relation matrix. Swapping the head and tail leaves that score unchanged, so the model cannot distinguish a relation from its reverse. (LLM, conf=0.92)
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedCausal:direct· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Supported
The sources with a verdict support this claim; the rest weren’t checked yet, have no full text we could read, or their verdicts aren’t rated yet.
In the paper
“Tensor factorization approaches have proved to be an effective SRL approach for KG completion [29, 4, 39, 26].”
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [29] [29] Maximilian Nickel, Volker Tresp, and Hans-Peter Kriegel. Factorizing yago: scalable machine learning for linked data. In World Wide Web , pages 271-280. ACM, 2012. - source
- Not matchedcites [4] [4] Antoine Bordes, Nicolas Usunier, Alberto Garcia-Duran, Jason Weston, and Oksana Yakhnenko. Translating embeddings for modeling multi-relational data. In NIPS , pages 2787-2795, 2013. -
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Supportedcites [39] [39] Théo Trouillon, Johannes Welbl, Sebastian Riedel, Éric Gaussier, and Guillaume Bouchard. Complex embeddings for simple link prediction. In ICML , pages 2071-2080, 2016. - source
The Introduction (p. 1) describes low-rank tensor completion as an increasingly popular approach to knowledge-graph link prediction, a task it identifies as part of statistical relational learning. The Abstract (p. 1) and Conclusion (p. 8) report that the paper’s factorization approach outperforms alternatives on standard link-prediction benchmarks, supporting the claim of effectiveness. (LLM, conf=0.91)
- Not matchedcites [26] [26] Dat Quoc Nguyen, Kairit Sirts, Lizhen Qu, and Mark Johnson. Stranse: a novel embedding model of entities and relationships in knowledge bases. In NAACL-HLT , 2016. -
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
Strength:boosted· not yet calibratedCausal:correlational· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“Viewing SimplE as a single-vector-per-entity model makes it easily integrable (or compatible) with other embedding models (in knowledge graph completion, computer vision and natural language processing) such as [35, 47, 36].”
What the sources say
- Partly supportedcites [35] [35] Adam Santoro, David Raposo, David G Barrett, Mateusz Malinowski, Razvan Pascanu, Peter Battaglia, and Tim Lillicrap. A simple neural network module for relational reasoning. In NIPS , 2017. - sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Visual question answering section (p. 10) says the paper’s Relation Network module can readily be combined with CNNs and LSTMs, supporting the citation as an example of an integrable model used with vision and language inputs. It does not discuss SimplE, single-vector-per-entity representations, or compatibility with knowledge-graph-completion embedding models. (LLM, conf=0.83)
- Supportedcites [47] [47] Hanwang Zhang, Zawlin Kyaw, Shih-Fu Chang, and Tat-Seng Chua. Visual translation embedding network for visual relation detection. In CVPR , volume 1, page 5, 2017. source
The citation identifies an embedding model in computer vision, rather than attributing the claim about SimplE’s ease of integration to this paper. Section 3.1, “Visual Translation Embedding,” describes VTransE as a model that maps visual object features into a relation embedding space. (LLM, conf=0.91)
- Supportedcites [36] [36] Michael Schlichtkrull, Thomas N Kipf, Peter Bloem, Rianne van den Berg, Ivan Titov, and Max Welling. Modeling relational data with graph convolutional networks. In European Semantic Web Conference , pages 593-607. Springer, 2018. - source
The citation appears in a list of examples of other embedding models, rather than as evidence for the citing authors’ conclusion about SimplE’s compatibility. The paper’s link-prediction model uses an R-GCN to produce latent entity representations for knowledge-base completion (model description, p. 1), so it fits the knowledge-graph example. (LLM, conf=0.85)
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedCausal:direct· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Partly supported
Every source the paper cites for this claim was checked and supports it.
In the paper
“Given that we use the same data splits and objective function as ComplEx, we report the results of CP, TransE, DistMult, and ComplEx from [39].”
What the sources say
- Supportedcites [39] [39] Théo Trouillon, Johannes Welbl, Sebastian Riedel, Éric Gaussier, and Guillaume Bouchard. Complex embeddings for simple link prediction. In ICML , pages 2071-2080, 2016. - source
The source specifies its FB15K and WN18 training, validation, and test splits in §4.2 (p. 5) and its regularized negative-log-likelihood objective in Appendix A (p. 11). Table 2 (§4.3, pp. 6–7) reports results for CP, TransE, DistMult, and ComplEx, as the citing sentence says it takes from this source. (LLM, conf=0.92)
Load-bearingStrength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. It may state two separate claims as one.
- Rests on an assumption: Using the same search grid on embedding size and λ as [39] makes the results directly comparable to [39].
- Supported
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The time complexity of both SimplE-ignr and SimplE is O ( d ) , i.e. linear in the size of vector embeddings.”
Load-bearingStrength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“This number is 2 for SimplE and 4 for ComplEx .”
Load-bearingStrength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“As argued earlier, with the same number of parameters, the number of computations in ComplEx are 4x and 2x more than SimplE-ignr and SimplE.”
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“According to ComplEx, the score for triple ( e 1 , r , e 3 ) is positive suggesting e 1 probably has relation r with e 3 . However the score for triple ( e 2 , r , e 3 ) is negative suggesting e 2 probably does not have relation r with e 3 .”
Strength:hedged· not yet calibratedCausal:correlational· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“On FB15k, SimplE outperforms the existing baselines and gives state-of-the-art results among tensor factorization approaches.”
Load-bearingStrength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
- Rests on an assumption: Using the same search grid on embedding size and λ as [39] makes the results directly comparable to [39].
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“For SimplE-ignr-bk and SimplE-bk, the filtered MRRs were 0 . 772 and 0 . 776 respectively, substantially higher than the case without background knowledge.”
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
- Rests on an assumption: The rules in Table 2 correctly describe background knowledge in WN18.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“For SimplE-ignr-bk, these numbers were 0 . 715 , 0 . 809 and 0 . 877 and for SimplE-bk they were 0 . 715 , 0 . 818 and 0 . 883 , also substantially higher than the models without background knowledge.”
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
- Rests on an assumption: The rules in Table 2 correctly describe background knowledge in WN18.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“These numbers were 0 . 334 , 0 . 404 , and 0 . 482 for SimplE, and 0 . 254 , 0 . 280 and 0 . 313 for ComplEx.”
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes? Load-bearing: unclear✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
- Rests on an assumption: The rules in Table 2 correctly describe background knowledge in WN18.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“As can be viewed in Table 2, most of the rules are of the form ∀ e i , e j ∈ E : ( e i , r 1 , e j ) ∈ ζ ⇔ ( e j , r 2 , e i ) ∈ ζ .”
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Rests on an assumption: The rules in Table 2 correctly describe background knowledge in WN18.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Such interpretability allows the embeddings learned through SimplE for an entity (or relation) to be potentially transferred to other domains.”
Strength:hedged· not yet calibratedCausal:conditional· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✗ Checkable: fails✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“SimplE can be viewed as a bilinear model similar to CP except that the M r matrices are constrained as in Fig 2(d).”
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In SimplE, each element of the embedding vector of the entities can be considered as a feature of the entity and the corresponding element of a relation can be considered as a measure of how important that feature is to the relation.”
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedCausal:correlational· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✗ Based: failsProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The constraint over M r matrices in SimplE is very similar to the constraint in DistMult.”
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedCausal:correlational· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“While the time complexity for TransE is O ( d ) where d is the size of the embedding vectors”
Load-bearingStrength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“RESCAL can be considered a bilinear model which imposes no constraints on the M r matrices.”
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Therefore, what is being learned about movies through observations about acted does not affect the predictions about likes and vice versa.”
Load-bearingStrength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“For ComplEx, if we consider the embedding for each entity e to be a single vector [ re e ; im e ] ∈ R 2 d , then it can be considered a bilinear model with its M r matrices constrained according to Fig. 2(b).”
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Thus, with the same number of parameters, SimplE-ignr and SimplE reduce the computations by a factor of 4 and 2 respectively compared to ComplEx .”
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“A quadratic time complexity and parameter growth may arise two issues: 1- scalability problems, 2- overfitting.”
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
- Rests on an assumption: Models with many parameters usually overfit and give poor performance.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“DistMult can be considered a bilinear model which restricts the M r matrices to be diagonal as in Fig. 2(a).”
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In CP, observations about likes only update the t vector of movies and observations about acted only update the h vector.”
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“DistMult and ComplEx have linear time complexities and the number of their parameters grow linearly with d .”
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“We showed that our model, called SimplE, performs very well empirically and has several interesting properties.”
Load-bearingStrength:boosted· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“To address this issue, [4] proposed a modification to raw MRR.”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [4] [4] Antoine Bordes, Nicolas Usunier, Alberto Garcia-Duran, Jason Weston, and Oksana Yakhnenko. Translating embeddings for modeling multi-relational data. In NIPS , pages 2787-2795, 2013. -
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim.
- Not matched
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“We tuned our hyper-parameters over the validation set.”
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“MRR is a more robust measure than mean rank , since a single bad ranking can largely influence mean rank .”
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedCausal:direct· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✗ Based: failsProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“SimplE (and SimplE-ignr) work especially well on this dataset in terms of filtered MRR and hit@1 , so SimplE tends to do well at having its first prediction being correct.”
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedCausal:correlational· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes? Load-bearing: unclear✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Since the only difference between e 1 and e 2 is that the imaginary part changes from 4 to 6 , it is difficult to associate a meaning to these numbers.”
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedSingle caseTests✓ Asserted: passes✗ Checkable: fails✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“For instance, three types of background knowledge can be incorporated into SimplE by tying the embeddings.”
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedCausal:direct· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✗ Based: failsProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“We computed the filtered MRR of our model over the validation set every 50 iterations for WN18 and every 100 iterations for FB 15 k and selected the iteration that resulted in the best validation filtered MRR.”
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Note that several other restrictions on the M r matrices are equivalent to SimplE, e.g., restricting M r matrices to be zero everywhere except on the counterdiagonal.”
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedCausal:correlational· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
The paper relies on this without support.
Models with many parameters usually overfit and give poor performance.
“Models with many parameters usually overfit and give poor performance.”
The paper relies on this without support.
For a triple (h,r,t) to hold in FSTransE, we should ideally have p_rh + v_r = α q_rt for some α.
“For any entity e and relation r , let p re = P r v e and q re = Q r v e . For a triple ( h , r , t ) to hold, we should ideally have p rh + v r = αq rt for some α .”
The paper relies on this without support.
The rules in Table 2 correctly describe background knowledge in WN18.
“To test this empirically, we conducted an experiment on WN18 in which we incorporated several such rules into the embeddings as outlined in Propositions 3, 4, and 5. The rules can be found in Table 2.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Using the same search grid on embedding size and λ as [39] makes the results directly comparable to [39].
“We used the same search grid on embedding size and λ as [39] to make our results directly comparable to their results.”
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?
The source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“SimplEx [152] has low performance for FB15k-237 and high performance for FB15k because FB15k contains inverse relations and SimplEx can model the inverse relations appropriately.”
From A Survey on Knowledge Graph Embeddings for Link Prediction (2021) · cites this paper as [152]
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“It has been demonstrated that SimplE is fully expressive, and therefore, unlike DistMult, it can model also asymmetric relations.”
From Knowledge Graph Embedding for Link Prediction (2021) · cites this paper as [27]
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“Examples of models that have been demonstrated to be fully expressive are SimplE [27], TuckER [6], ComplEx [61] and HolE [60].”
From Knowledge Graph Embedding for Link Prediction (2021) · cites this paper as [27]
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
Each contradiction between two passages listed here was confirmed by an independent check.
Proposition 2 proof substitutes a multiplier for its reciprocal
MinorFrom p rs 1 + v r = α 3 q rs 2, substituting for q rs 2 requires division by α 3, not multiplication by it. The displayed equality therefore does not follow for general α 3.
“Therefore, p rs 2 + v r = α 2 q rs 2 = α 2 α 3 ( p rs 1 + v r )”
“Then we know p rs 1 + v r = α 3 q rs 2 .”
Citations
Cites
WordNet: a lexical database for English
Miller, G. A. (1995) · Communications of the ACM · doi:10.1145/219717.219748 · Cited by 14,015 · cited 1×
“Datasets: We conducted experiments on two standard benchmarks: WN18 a subset of Wordnet [24], and FB15k a subset of Freebase [2].”
MethodApproximation by superpositions of a sigmoidal function
Cybenko, G. (1989) · Mathematics of Control, Signals, and Systems · doi:10.1007/bf02551274 · Cited by 13,883
TensorFlow: Large-Scale Machine Learning on Heterogeneous Distributed Systems
Abadi, M., Agarwal, A., Barham, P., Brevdo, E., Chen, Z., Citro, C., Corrado, G. S., Davis, A., Dean, J., Devin, M., et al. (2016) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.1603.04467 · Cited by 9,408 · cited 1×
“Implementation: We implemented SimplE in TensorFlow [1].”
Approximation capabilities of multilayer feedforward networks
Hornik, K. (1991) · Neural Networks · doi:10.1016/0893-6080(91)90009-t · Cited by 6,091 · cited 1×
“xpressive as it forces relations to be symmetric. It has been shown in [40] that ComplEx is fully expressive with embeddings of length at most jEjjRj. According to the universal approximation theorem [5, 16], under certain conditions, neural networks are universal approximators of continuous functions over compact set…”
BackgroundModeling Relational Data with Graph Convolutional Networks
Schlichtkrull, M., Kipf, T. N., Bloem, P., van den Berg, R., Titov, I., & Welling, M. (2018) · Lecture Notes in Computer Science · doi:10.1007/978-3-319-93417-4_38 · Cited by 5,570 · cited 1×
“Viewing SimplE as a single-vector-per-entity model makes it easily integrable (or compatible) with other embedding models (in knowledge graph completion, computer vision and natural language processing) such as [35, 47, 36].”
BackgroundFreebase: 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 · cited 2×
“We conducted experiments on two standard benchmarks: WN18 a subset of Wordnet (Miller, 1995), and FB15k a subset of Freebase (Bollacker et al., 2008).”
MethodKnowledge Graph Embedding by Translating on Hyperplanes
Wang, Z., Zhang, J., Feng, J., & Chen, Z. (2014) · Proceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence · doi:10.1609/aaai.v28i1.8870 · Cited by 3,915 · cited 1×
“Translational approaches (Bordes et al., 2013b; Ji et al., 2015; Wang et al., 2014; Nguyen et al., 2016) apply an additive function over the embeddings.”
MethodLearning Entity and Relation Embeddings for Knowledge Graph Completion
Lin, Y., Liu, Z., Sun, M., Liu, Y., & Zhu, X. (2015) · Proceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence · doi:10.1609/aaai.v29i1.9491 · Cited by 3,749 · cited 4×
“In TransE [4] In TransR [22], P r = Q r .”
InfluentialApproximation by superpositions of a sigmoidal function
Cybenko, G. (1992) · Math. Control. Signals Syst. · doi:10.1007/bf02134016 · Cited by 3,475 · cited 1×
“According to the universal approximation theorem [5, 16], under certain conditions, neural networks are universal approximators of continuous functions over compact sets.”
BackgroundKnowledge 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 · cited 1×
“Details and discussions of these approaches can be found in several recent surveys [27, 43].”
Background
Flagged first, then by citations
13 of the 69 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.
Research works printed but not linked: 5
- [4][4] Antoine Bordes, Nicolas Usunier, Alberto Garcia-Duran, Jason Weston, and Oksana Yakhnenko. Translating embeddings for modeling multi-relational data. In NIPS , pages 2787-2795, 2013. -
- [28][28] Maximilian Nickel, Volker Tresp, and Hans-Peter Kriegel. A three-way model for collective learning on multi-relational data. In ICML , volume 11, pages 809-816, 2011. -
- [30][30] Maximilian Nickel, Xueyan Jiang, and Volker Tresp. Reducing the rank in relational factorization models by including observable patterns. In NIPS , pages 1179-1187, 2014. -
- [37][37] Richard Socher, Danqi Chen, Christopher D Manning, and Andrew Ng. Reasoning with neural tensor networks for knowledge base completion. In NIPS , 2013. -
- [42][42] Quan Wang, Bin Wang, Li Guo, et al. Knowledge base completion using embeddings and rules. In International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence , pages 1859-1866, 2015. -
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Items 401–475 of 475
Exploring Hierachical Neighbor Information Interaction for Few-Shot Knowledge Graph Completion
Li, Z., Feng, L., Xu, L., Shuai, Q., & Yue, L. (2024) · International Joint Conference on Neural Networks (IJCNN) · doi:10.1109/ijcnn60899.2024.10649963 · Cited by 1
“Common methods include TransE [6], DistMult [7], ComplEx [8], SimplE [9], and so on.”
MethodEmbedding Knowledge Graphs in Function Spaces
Teyou, L. M. K., Demir, C., & Ngomo, A.-C. N. (2024) · ACM International Conference on Information and Knowledge Management (CIKM) · doi:10.1145/3627673.3679819 · Cited by 1
Deep Learning Roles based Approach to Link Prediction in Networks
Gupta, A., & Raghav, Y. (2020) · doi:10.5121/csit.2020.101416 · Cited by 1
Liu, Y., Liu, J., Long, Z., et al. (2021) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-3-030-74386-4_4 · Cited by 1
Knowledge Graph Representation Learning for Link Prediction with Three-Way Decisions
Peng, Z., & Yu, H. Z. (2021) · Lecture notes in computer science · doi:10.1007/978-3-030-87334-9_23 · Cited by 1
A Framework for Knowledge-Derived Query Suggestions
Rezayi, S., Lipka, N., Vinay, V., et al. (2021) · IEEE International Conference on Big Data (BigData) · doi:10.1109/bigdata52589.2021.9671344 · Cited by 1
“More recently, there has been a lot of work on link prediction in knowledge graphs [4], [29], [42], [43].”
BackgroundKnowledge Graph Completion by Multi-Channel Translating Embeddings
Fang, H., Yu, P., Feng, L., Zhou, F., Li, W., Wang, Y., Zhao, M., Yan, X., & Wu, J. (2022) · IEEE International Conference on Tools with Artificial Intelligence (ICTAI) · doi:10.1109/ictai56018.2022.00059 · Cited by 1
“Then variants like SimplE [10], QuatE [9] map the relation matrix from diverse high-dimension spaces.”
RTFE: A Recursive Temporal Fact Embedding Framework for Temporal Knowledge Graph CompletionPreprint
Xu, Y., Haihong, E., Song, M., et al. (2020) · arXiv (Cornell University) · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2009.14653 · Cited by 1
“In recent years, a lot of work (Bordes et al., 2013; Wang et al., 2014; Lin et al., 2015; Kazemi and Poole, 2018; Schlichtkrull et al., 2018; Sun et al., 2019; Zhang et al., 2020) has focused on KG completion by methods of graph embedding.”
BackgroundCEAR: Cross-Entity Aware Reranker for Knowledge Base CompletionPreprint
Kolluru, K., Chauhan, M., Nandwani, Y., Singla, P., & Mausam (2021) · arXiv (Cornell University) · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2104.08741 · Cited by 3
“As observed in other KBC models, we find that the absolute tail performance is significantly higher than the head performance.”
MethodInfluentialComputer Science & Information Technology (CS & IT)
(2020) · doi:10.5121/csit.2020.1015 · Cited by 1
Deep Learning Meets Knowledge Graphs: A Comprehensive SurveyPreprint
Yu, S., Xu, C., Bai, X., Kuncheerathodi, R., Firmin, S., & Xia, F. (2022) · Research Square · doi:10.21203/rs.3.rs-2021923/v1 · Cited by 1
Dimensions Effect in Word Embeddings of Knowledge Graph
Huang, Q., & Ouyang, W. (2019) · Lecture notes in computer science · doi:10.1007/978-3-030-26766-7_49
Incorporating Entity Type Information into Knowledge Representation Learning
Huang, W., Wang, G., Zhang, H., & Chen, F. (2020) · IEEE International Conference on Data Science in Cyberspace · doi:10.1109/dsc50466.2020.00023
“Some KRL models like RESCAL [6], DistMult [7], ComplEx [8], SimplE [9] and TuckER [10] are based on tensor factorization, others such as ConvE [11], ConvKB [12] and HypER [13] are using neural networks.”
MethodPRTransE: Emphasize More Important Facts Based on Pagerank for Knowledge Graph Completion
Li, Z., Zhang, B., Liu, Y., et al. (2020) · Lecture notes in computer science · doi:10.1007/978-3-030-59585-2_2
Research Progress of Knowledge Graph Embedding
Duan, C., You, H., Cai, Z., et al. (2020) · Communications in computer and information science · doi:10.1007/978-981-15-8083-3_17
Knowledge Graph Embedding with Relation Constraint
Yang, C., Song, X., Zhang, H., & Li, B. (2021) · Communications in computer and information science · doi:10.1007/978-981-16-0479-9_4
(2021) · PeerJ Computer Science · doi:10.7287/peerj-cs.521v0.1/reviews/1
“It is a problem with important applications in various fields, including link prediction (Goyal and Ferrara, 2018c; Kazemi and Poole, 2018; Alharbi et al., 2016; Wang et al., 2016), product recommendation (Koren et al., 2009), data visualization (van der Maaten and Hinton, 2008; Tang et al., 2016b;…”
Overview of Knowledge Graph Completion Algorithms Based on Representation Learning
Zhou, Y., Feng, J., Yang, Z., & Wang, H. (2021) · International Conference on Cloud Computing and Big Data Analytics (ICCCBDA) · doi:10.1109/icccbda51879.2021.9442554
“SimplE [10] is a tensor decomposition method based on CP decomposition.”
MethodNode Classification on Relational Graphs Using Deep-RGCNs
Chandra, N. (2021) · doi:10.15368/theses.2021.18
HyperEA: Hyperbolic Entity Alignment between Knowledge Graphs
Gao, S. (2021) · International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Big Data (ICAIBD) · doi:10.1109/icaibd51990.2021.9459046
The Concept Information of Graph Granule with Application to Embedding Learning of Knowledge GraphPreprint
Niu, J., Chen, D., Ma, Y., et al. (2021) · Research Square · doi:10.21203/rs.3.rs-453545/v1
“For comparison, the experimental results of several baselines were directly reproduced from the existing literatures, in which the MRR are from Kazemi and Poole (2018) and Tan et al. (2018), and the results of TransG come from Jia et al. (2018).”
MethodFinding Latent Relationships from Auxiliary Information for Tensor Completion
Zou, Y., An, C., & Qiu, D. (2021) · IEEE International Conference on Big Data and Artificial Intelligence (BDAI) · doi:10.1109/bdai52447.2021.9515213
Integrating Local Closure Coefficient into Weighted Networks for Link Prediction
Wu, J. (2021) · Communications in computer and information science · doi:10.1007/978-981-16-5940-9_4
Hyperbolic Knowledge Graph Embedding with Logical Pattern Learning
Li, W., & Peng, R. (2021) · International Joint Conference on Neural Networks (IJCNN) · doi:10.1109/ijcnn52387.2021.9534404
Knowledge Graph Completion Based on the Joint Embedding of Entities
Liu, L., Zhu, C., & Zhu, W. (2021) · Journal of Physics Conference Series · doi:10.1088/1742-6596/2024/1/012004
“For datasets, we utilize the standard datasets ICEWS14, ICEWS05-15 and GDELT followed by [13], Hit@K and MRR are used as metrics.”
MethodEmpowering Knowledge Bases: a Machine Learning Perspective.
d’Amato, C. (2021) · CINECA IRIS Institutional Research Information System (University of Bari Aldo Moro)
Principled Representation Learning for Entity AlignmentPreprint
Guo, L., Sun, Z., Chen, M., Hu, W., Zhang, Q., & Chen, H. (2021) · arXiv (Cornell University) · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2110.10871
“The entities in the right of Figure 2a are not “fully expressed” [19, 32].”
BackgroundCoherent and Consistent Relational Transfer Learning with Auto-encoders.
Strömfelt, H., Dickens, L., Garcez, A. D., et al. (2021) · City Research Online (City University London)
Complex-InversE: Improving bilinear knowledge graph embeddings by mapping into complex space
Cao, Y., & Miao, Z. (2021) · Journal of Intelligent & Fuzzy Systems · doi:10.3233/jifs-212374
“Kazemiet al. [10] proposed a knowledge graph embedding method SimplE for knowledge graph link prediction.”
Anpassung von Alignments an Veränderungen in Ontologien
Jurisch, M. (2021) · doi:10.21248/gups.61804
Knowledge Graph Completion via Bidirectional Translation and Interaction
Zhang, Q., Jiang, D., Wang, X., & Wang, R. (2021) · IEEE International Conference on Cloud Computing and Intelligence Systems (CCIS) · doi:10.1109/ccis53392.2021.9754641
A review of Knowledge graph link prediction using graph neural networksPreprint
Zamini, M., Reza, H., & Rabiei, M. (2022) · Research Square · doi:10.21203/rs.3.rs-1762419/v1
Explaining automatic answers generated from knowledge base embedding models.
Ruschel, A. (2022) · Digital Library of Theses and Dissertations (Universidade de São Paulo) · doi:10.11606/d.3.2022.tde-07072022-084934
“As examples of embeddings from this family we list RESCAL (NICKEL; TRESP; KRIEGEL, 2011), DistMult (YANG et al., 2015), HolE (NICKEL; ROSASCO; POGGIO, 2015), ComplexE (TROUILLON et al., 2016), SimplE (KAZEMI; POOLE, 2018), and finally, Analogy (LIU; WU; YANG, 2017).”
BackgroundMethodDeep Learning in Ecology: Data-driven Methods for Ecosystem AnalysisPreprint
Hart, J. D. A. (2022) · Thesis Commons (OSF Preprints) · doi:10.31237/osf.io/bnm5w
Attentive Flexible Translation Embedding in Top-N Sparse Sequential Recommendations.
Seo, M., & Kim, M. H. (2022) · International Journal of Interactive Multimedia and Artificial Intelligence · doi:10.9781/ijimai.2022.10.007
A Double-layer Attention Heterogeneous Graph Neural Network Based on Coupled P System
Zhang, J., & Liu, X. (2022) · International Conference on Advanced Electronic Materials, Computers and Software Engineering (AEMCSE) · doi:10.1109/aemcse55572.2022.00088
“Therefore, the application of heterogeneous graph is significantly wide, among which researches include natural language processing [6, 9], recommendation systems [10, 11], and knowledge graphs [12, 13], etc., which have attracted a lot of attention.”
BackgroundA Link Prediction Model Based on Improved TuckER Decomposition and Neural Tensor Network
Zhang, J., Qian, X., & Liu, P. (2022) · International Conference on Data Science and Information Technology (DSIT) · doi:10.1109/dsit55514.2022.9943950
“Reference [12] proposes a linear algorithm using CP (Canonical Polyadic) [14] decomposition SimplE.”
MethodHTransE: Hybrid Translation-based Embedding for Knowledge Graphs
Shah, A., Molokwu, B. C., & Kobti, Z. (2022) · IEEE International Conference on Knowledge Graph (ICKG) · doi:10.1109/ickg55886.2022.00037
“SimplE [18] resolve this issue via computing the inverse of every relation; and generates a corresponding embedding for it, v − 1 r ∈ R d .”
BackgroundMethodInfluentialGenome-scale enzymatic reaction prediction by variational graph autoencodersPreprint
Wang, C., Yuan, C., Wang, Y., Chen, R., Shi, Y., Patti, G. J., & Hou, Q. (2023) · bioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) · doi:10.1101/2023.03.08.531729
“The prediction of MPI based on the enzymatic reaction network takes advantage of inter-144 connected features of proteins and metabolites, which can be formulated as a so-called “link prediction” computational problem [20, 21].”
BackgroundAnalysis of Semantic-based Knowledge Graph Embedding Models in Uncertainty Knowledge Graphs
Li, J., & Li, G. (2022) · IEEE International Conference on High Performance Computing and Communications; IEEE International Conference on Smart City; IEEE International Conference on Data Science and Systems (HPCC/SmartCity/DSS) · doi:10.1109/hpcc-dss-smartcity-dependsys57074.2022.00310
“In addition, different variants of translational approaches such as TransE, FTransE, STransE, TransH and TransR have restrictions in encoding reflexive, symmetric and transitivity relations [11].”
BackgroundGraph Neural Networks to Improve Knowledge Graph Embedding: A Survey
Chetoui, I., Bachari, E. E., Adnani, M. E., & Hassan, A. E. (2023) · Lecture notes in networks and systems · doi:10.1007/978-3-031-26384-2_2
SEEN: Seen: Sharpening Explanations for Graph Neural Networks Using Explanations From Neighborhoods
Cho, H., Oh, Y., & Jeon, E. (2023) · Advances in Artificial Intelligence and Machine Learning · doi:10.54364/aaiml.2023.1168
“Advances in GNNmodels havemadeGNNs a favoredmodel for various graph-related tasks, including node classification [1, 2, 6], graph classification [7, 8, 18], and link prediction [19, 20].”
Analysis of student management path optimization in higher education institutions with ISM
Yan, Z. (2023) · Applied Mathematics and Nonlinear Sciences · doi:10.2478/amns.2023.1.00337
Query-Specific Temporal Knowledge Graph Representation Learning Model
Zuo, Y., Liu, Z., Zhou, Y., Zhan, M., & Zhan, P. (2022) · IEEE Smart World Congress (SWC) · doi:10.1109/smartworld-uic-atc-scalcom-digitaltwin-pricomp-metaverse56740.2022.00190
“DE-SimplE [22] provides a time-specific diachronic entity embedding, combined with the same score function as SimplE [23] to measure the rationality of facts.”
MethodNELLIE: Never-Ending Linking for Linked Open Data
Ahmed, A. F., Sherif, M. A., & Ngomo, A.-C. N. (2023) · IEEE Access · doi:10.1109/access.2023.3300694
“The reason is that BERT is an advanced language 22 https://git.cs.uni-paderborn.de/kgfusionpg/kgfusion/-/blob/main/ LIMESConfig.xml model that takes into account semantic, contextual and relation between words in its word representation vectors.”
BackgroundMethodInfluentialNeuro-Logic Learning for Relation Reasoning over Event Knowledge Graph
Tang, W., Kong, Q., Luo, Y., et al. (2023) · IEEE International Conference on Intelligence and Security Informatics (ISI) · doi:10.1109/isi58743.2023.10297212
“We choose three groups of knowledge graph reasoning methods as baselines, namely representation learning-based methods including ComplEx [28], SimplE [29] and RotatE [7], the representative rule-based method RNNLogic [13] and the representative neural network model RED-GNN [25].”
BackgroundMethodA Review in Knowledge Extraction from Knowledge Bases
Yáñez-Romero, F., Montoyo, A., Muñoz, R., Gutiérrez, Y., & Suárez, A. (2023) · International conference Recent advances in natural language processing · doi:10.26615/978-954-452-092-2_012
“SimplE is a tensor factorization method based con Canonical Polyadic (CP) decomposition (Kazemi and Poole, 2018).”
MethodMultimodal Link Prediction Method for Commodity Knowledge Graph
Zhang, L., Yang, C., Zhang, H., & Xiang, H. (2023) · International Conference on High Performance Compilation, Computing and Communications (HP3C) · doi:10.1145/3606043.3606063
“…and relations as complex vectors to capture antisymmetric relations, Analogy [16] captures more relations by representing relations as normal matrices, and SimplE [17] learns two independent embedding vectors for each relation, one for ordinary relations and the other for reverse relations.”
BackgroundHyper-Relational Knowledge Graph Embedding Based on Type Constraints
Wang, C., Li, X., Gan, T., et al. (2023) · International Conference on Advanced Computer Theory and Engineering · doi:10.1109/icacte59887.2023.10335227
“For example, HypE[13] generalizes SimplE[14], using convolutional filters for entity embedding and multilinear products for credibility measures.”
MethodRarKGQA: Multi-hop Question and Answering Method Based on Knowledge Graph Embedding
Fangri, R., Altenbek, G., Ma, Y., & Haisa, G. (2023) · IEEE International Conference on Pattern Recognition and Machine Learning (PRML) · doi:10.1109/prml59573.2023.10348187
“Nickel [34] proposed the RESCAL semantic evaluation model, which models the latent semantics of triadic entities to complete the embedding representation of knowledge graphs from a semantic perspective.”
BackgroundAlgoritmos para explicação responsável de recomendações.
de Souza, D. L. (2023) · doi:10.11606/d.3.2023.tde-05022024-111423
Kwon, H., Kim, S., Ha, J., et al. (2024) · Intelligent Systems with Applications · doi:10.1016/j.iswa.2024.200345
Graph-Enriched Biomedical Language Models: A Research Proposal
Sakhovskiy, A., Panchenko, A., & Tutubalina, E. V. (2023) · doi:10.18653/v1/2023.ijcnlp-srw.11
“They compared semantic matching methods, such as TransE (Bordes et al., 2013), DistMult (Yang et al., 2015), ComplEx (Trouillon et al., 2016), SimplE (Kazemi and Poole, 2018), and Ro-tatE (Sun et al., 2019), for link prediction quality on SNOMED-CT dataset.”
MethodSequence-to-Sequence Knowledge Graph Completion Based On Gated Attention Unit
Yi, F., Wei, X., Liu, X., & Jiang, X. (2023) · IEEE International Conference on Parallel and Distributed Systems (ICPADS) · doi:10.1109/icpads60453.2023.00195
“[3], SimplE [21] and RotatE [5].”
Fast knowledge graph completion using graphics processing units
Lee, C.-H., Kang, D., & Song, H. J. (2024) · Journal of Parallel and Distributed Computing · doi:10.1016/j.jpdc.2024.104885 · Cited by 1
A multi-view representation learning framework for commonsense knowledge bases
Zhang, W., Chen, C., Chen, T., Liu, J., Ye, Q., & Ruan, T. (2024) · Information Sciences · doi:10.1016/j.ins.2024.120704
Multi-Source Information Graph Embedding with Ensemble Learning for Link Prediction
Hou, C., Wang, X., Luo, X., et al. (2024) · Electronics · doi:10.3390/electronics13142762
Capturing Knowledge Graphs and Rules with Octagon Embeddings
Charpenay, V., & Schockaert, S. (2024) · International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence · doi:10.24963/ijcai.2024/364
Dan, Q., Cui, D., Peng, Z., Li, Q., He, J., & Qiu, J. (2024) · International Conference on Internet of Things, Automation and Artificial Intelligence (IoTAAI) · doi:10.1109/iotaai62601.2024.10692613
Universal Knowledge Graph Embedding Framework Based on High-Quality Negative Sampling and Weighting
Zhang, P., Peng, H., Fang, Y., Yang, Z., Hu, Y., Tan, Z., & Xiao, W. (2024) · Mathematics · doi:10.3390/math12223489
Embedding Hierarchical Tree Structure of Concepts in Knowledge Graph Embedding
Yu, J., Zhang, C., Hu, Z., & Ji, Y. (2024) · Electronics · doi:10.3390/electronics13224486
Cheng, K., & Sun, Y. (2024) · Synthesis lectures on data, semantics and knowledge · doi:10.1007/978-3-031-72008-6_3
A Knowledge Graph Completion Model with Path-Specific Learning
Zheng, X., Zhang, Z., Li, R., & Wu, X. (2024) · IEEE International Conference on Medical Artificial Intelligence (MedAI) · doi:10.1109/medai62885.2024.00071
“• Translation based methods: TransE [18], TransR [20], PTransE [28], • Tensor factorization based methods: DistMult [22], RotatE [46], ComplEx [23], SimplE [47].”
Few-Shot Knowledge Graph Completion Based on Selective Attention and the Transformer
Wang, P., Jia, C., Dong, Y., et al. (2024) · Communications in computer and information science · doi:10.1007/978-981-97-9671-7_5
IF-NS: A New negative sampling framework for knowledge graph embedding using influence function
Cai, M., Deng, Z., & Chen, X. (2025) · Knowledge-Based Systems · doi:10.1016/j.knosys.2025.113258
Lv, M., & Liu, C. (2024) · doi:10.1109/ictech63197.2024.00020
“This transformation corresponds to the relational operator in knowledge graph embedding [14].”
AdaE: Knowledge Graph Embedding With Adaptive Embedding Sizes
Guan, Z., Zhang, F., Zhang, Z., Zhuang, F., Wang, F., An, Z., & Xu, Y. (2025) · IEEE Transactions on Knowledge and Data Engineering · doi:10.1109/tkde.2025.3566270
“Given a ( s, r, o ) triple, existing KGE models typicallytakeembeddingsofentitiesandrelationsfromthetriple as input and output a score representing the plausibility of the triple [10].”
Dimitriou, P., & Karyotis, V. A. (2025) · SSRN Electronic Journal · doi:10.2139/ssrn.5365682
Chained Prediction Algorithm for Multi-Spatial Knowledge Graphs
Wang, M., Wu, P., Xiao, L.-N., et al. (2025) · Chinese Control and Decision Conference (CCDC) · doi:10.1109/ccdc65474.2025.11090937
Heuristic Custom Similarity Index (HCSI): A novel machine learning approach for link prediction
Dimitriou, P., & Karyotis, V. A. (2025) · Journal of Computational Science · doi:10.1016/j.jocs.2025.102719
Metadata
- Authors
- Kazemi, S. M., & Poole, D.
- Affiliations
- University of British Columbia (CA)
- ORCID
- Poole, David
- Venue
- arXiv
- Publisher
- arXiv
- Published
- 2018
- ISSN
- 2331-8422 (ISSN-L)
- arXiv
- 1802.04868
- OpenAlex
- W2785761199
- Cited by
- 476
- References
- 69
- Citations by year
- 2026: 2 · 2025: 49 · 2024: 68 · 2023: 80 · 2022: 91 · 2021: 95 · 2020: 70 · 2019: 20
- Type
- posted content
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- arxiv.org
- 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 › Mathematics › Computational Mathematics › Tensor decomposition and applications
- Keywords
- link prediction, knowledge graphs, SIMPLE, canonical polyadic decomposition, tensor decomposition, entity embeddings, weight tying, expressivity, interpretable embeddings
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.
A language model drew the claims from the paper on 2026-10-23, under version 3 of the claim definition (model deepseek-v4.1-flash, prompt extract-v3).
A second model labelled each claim on 2026-10-23 (model jev-1.13-20260917, definition revision gold-guideline-v0.2).
Cited sources are checked with a language model’s help (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
