CoChat
Sign Up
PreprintCited by 115Advanced Graph Neural NetworksTopological and Geometric Data AnalysisNeural Networks and Applications

Hyperbolic Entailment Cones for Learning Hierarchical Embeddings

Open access
Ganea, Octavian-Eugen, Bécigneul, Gary, Hofmann, Thomas·2018·arXiv
DOI 10.48550/arxiv.1804.01882arXiv 1804.01882
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

Learning graph representations via low-dimensional embeddings that preserve relevant network properties is an important class of problems in machine learning. We here present a novel method to embed directed acyclic graphs. Following prior work, we first advocate for using hyperbolic spaces which provably model tree-like structures better than Euclidean geometry. Second, we view hierarchical relations as partial orders defined using a family of nested geodesically convex cones. We prove that these entailment cones admit an optimal shape with a closed form expression both in the Euclidean and hyperbolic spaces, and they canonically define the embedding learning process. Experiments show significant improvements of our method over strong recent baselines both in terms of representational capacity and generalization.

AI snapshot

Written from the paper’s full text.

TL;DR

The paper introduces geodesically convex entailment cones for embedding directed acyclic graphs and hierarchical relations, with closed-form optimal cone shapes in Euclidean and hyperbolic space. On WordNet hypernym link prediction, hyperbolic entailment cones outperform strong baselines, especially as more transitive-closure edges are available during training.

Key findings

  • The optimal entailment cones satisfying axial symmetry, rotation invariance, continuity, and transitivity admit closed-form expressions in both Euclidean and hyperbolic geometry; the authors also derive a closed-form exponential map in the Poincaré ball.
  • On WordNet link prediction, hyperbolic cones achieve test F1 of 80.1%, 86.0%, and 92.8% at embedding dimension 5 for 10%, 25%, and 50% of non-basic transitive-closure edges in training, and 85.9%, 91.0%, and 94.4% at dimension 10 for the same settings.
  • Hyperbolic cones are better than all baselines in all settings except 0% training edges, where order embeddings are better; once a small percentage of transitive-closure edges is available, improvements are sometimes more than 8% F1.
  • Hyperbolic cones show the largest growth when transitive-closure edges are added at train time.

Methods

  • The model represents an entailment relation \((u,v)\) as \(v\) belonging to the entailment cone \(S_{\psi(u)}^u\), trained with a max-margin loss on angles using margin \(\gamma=0.01\), 10 negative edges per positive edge, batch size 10, learning rate 1e-4, and projection outside an \(\epsilon=0.1\) ball.
  • Data: the full transitive closure of the WordNet noun hierarchy with the root removed, containing 82,114 nodes and 661,127 edges; basic transitive-reduction edges are always in training, while non-basic edges are split into validation (5%), test (5%), and training fractions of 0%, 10%, 25%, or 50%.
  • Baselines are Simple Euclidean embeddings, Poincaré embeddings, and Order embeddings; evaluation uses precision, recall, and F1, with thresholds tuned on validation, and negative validation/test pairs generated by corrupting each positive edge with five \(u'\) and five \(v'\) non-edges.

Limitations

  • The paper states that future work should test whether entailment cones can embed more complex data such as sentences or images; the current experiments are limited to WordNet noun hierarchy link prediction.
  • The paper reports that order embeddings are better in the 0% training-edge setting, and that initialization is very important because the loss is highly non-convex; hyperbolic cones are initialized from Poincaré embeddings pretrained for 100 epochs and rescaled by 0.7.
  • The paper states that full Riemannian optimization did not give significant empirical improvements over the retraction approximation, so the faster retraction was used; evident from the text, evaluation is restricted to low-dimensional settings (5 and 10 dimensions) and one WordNet-based DAG task.

Model-written summary. Check it against the paper before relying on it.

Integrity signals

Registry

DataCite · 10.48550/arxiv.1804.01882

Cites

37 of 37 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Nothing to recompute.

Claims the paper makes

15 of 29 cited sources checked · 10 supported · 0 flagged · accuracy not yet measured

  • Premisecitation
    § Abstract · p. 1

    Hyperbolic spaces provably model tree-like structures better than Euclidean geometry.

    “Following prior work, we first advocate for using hyperbolic spaces which provably model tree-like structures better than Euclidean geometry.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim1 of 3 sources checked
    • cites Gromov, 1987 source
    • cites Bowditch, 2006 source
    • cites Sarkar, 2011 source

      Searches for Euclidean geometry, trees, and distortion found no substantive passage from the paper’s body. The indexed result contains an abstract describing low-distortion embeddings in the hyperbolic plane, but no body-text passage establishing the claimed comparison with Euclidean geometry; the abstract cannot decide the verdict under the evidence rule. (LLM, conf=0.70)

      Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Premiseown data
    § 1. Introduction · p. 2

    The approach of Nickel & Kiela (2017) suffers from its loss function causing most points to collapse on the border of the Poincaré ball.

    “However, the approach of (Nickel & Kiela, 2017) suffers from a few drawbacks: first, their loss function causes most points to collapse on the border of the Poincar´ e ball, as exemplified in Figure 3.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim1 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Nickel & Kiela, 2017 source

      Section 3 (p. 4) says leaf nodes can be placed close to the Poincaré ball’s boundary to represent hierarchy. It does not say that most points collapse there, or that the loss function causes such a collapse. Section 3.2 (p. 5) instead describes a training step intended to avoid moving too far toward the boundary. (LLM, conf=0.83)

      Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Premisecitation
    § 1. Introduction · p. 2

    Hyperbolic spaces have been observed to provide powerful representations of entailment relations.

    “From a machine learning perspective, recently, hyperbolic spaces have been observed to provide powerful representations of entailment relations (Nickel & Kiela, 2017).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim1 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Nickel & Kiela, 2017 source
  • Premisecitation
    § 1. Introduction · p. 1

    The exponential growth property enables hyperbolic spaces to embed any weighted tree while almost preserving their metric.

    “This exponential growth property enables hyperbolic spaces to embed any weighted tree while almost preserving their metric 3 (Gromov, 1987; Bowditch, 2006; Sarkar, 2011).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim1 of 3 sources checked
    • cites Gromov, 1987 source
    • cites Bowditch, 2006 source
    • cites Sarkar, 2011 source

      The indexed matches contain only an Abstract and bibliographic metadata, not a passage from the paper’s full text that can serve as evidence under the stated rule. Searches for “exponential,” “growth,” and weighted-tree embedding found no qualifying full-text passage establishing the attributed explanation. (LLM, conf=0.72)

      Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Findingown data
    § 5. Experiments · p. 8

    Full Riemannian optimization does not yield significant empirical improvements over approximating it with a retraction map for hyperbolic models.

    “For the hyperbolic models, we do not find significant empirical improvements when using full Riemannian optimization instead of approximating it with a retraction map as done in (Nickel & Kiela, 2017).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim1 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Nickel & Kiela, 2017 source
  • May combine two claims. 15
  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim. 16
  • The quote only partly states this claim. 3

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisereasoning
    § 1. Introduction · p. 2

    The hyperbolic distance alone, being symmetric, is not capable of encoding asymmetric relations needed for entailment detection, so a heuristic score is chosen to account for concept generality or specificity encoded in the embedding norm.

    “Second, the hyperbolic distance alone (being symmetric) is not capable of encoding asymmetric relations needed for entailment detection, thus a heuristic score is chosen to account for concept generality or specificity encoded in the embedding norm.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim1 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Nickel & Kiela, 2017 source

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Premisecitation
    § 1. Introduction · p. 2

    The latent hierarchical structure emerges as a simple reflection of the space's negative curvature.

    “The latent hierarchical structure surprisingly emerges as a simple reflection of the space's negative curvature.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim1 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Nickel & Kiela, 2017 source

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data
    § Abstract · p. 1

    Experiments show significant improvements of the method over strong recent baselines both in terms of representational capacity and generalization, including on hypernymy link prediction for word embeddings over Nickel & Kiela (2017) and Vendrov et al. (2015).

    “Experiments show significant improvements of our method over strong recent baselines both in terms of representational capacity and generalization.”
    • Also stated in: § 1. Introduction · p. 2 · plain
      “Experimentally, we learn high quality embeddings and improve over experimental results in (Nickel & Kiela, 2017) and (Vendrov et al., 2015) on hypernymy link prediction for word embeddings, both in terms of capacity of the model and generalization performance.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim2 of 2 sources checked
    • cites Nickel & Kiela, 2017 source
    • cites Vendrov et al., 2015 source

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation
    § 2.2. Hyperbolic geometry · p. 4

    Any tree can be embedded with arbitrary low distortion into the Poincaré disk (with only 2 dimensions), whereas this is not true for Euclidean spaces even when an unbounded number of dimensions is allowed.

    “Conversely, any tree can be embedded with arbitrary low distortion into the Poincar´ e disk (with only 2 dimensions), whereas this is not true for Euclidean spaces even when an unbounded number of dimensions is allowed (Sarkar, 2011; De Sa et al., 2018).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim1 of 2 sources checked
    • cites Sarkar, 2011 source

      The indexed results for distortion, embedding, and hyperbolic space returned only abstract and bibliographic text, not a passage from the paper’s full text that can serve as evidence under this rubric. No eligible passage establishes the claim about arbitrarily low distortion in the Poincaré disk or the comparison with Euclidean spaces. (LLM, conf=0.62)

      Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
    • cites De Sa et al., 2018

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingcitation
    § 1. Introduction · p. 2

    An analytic closed-form expression for the exponential map in the n-dimensional Poincaré ball is computed, allowing full Riemannian optimization in the Poincaré ball, as opposed to the approximate optimization method used by Nickel & Kiela (2017).

    “We also compute an analytic closed-form expression for the exponential map in the n -dimensional Poincar´ e ball, allowing us to perform full Riemannian optimization (Bonnabel, 2013) in the Poincar´ e ball, as opposed to the approximate optimization method used by (Nickel & Kiela, 2017).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim2 of 2 sources checked
    • cites Bonnabel, 2013 source
    • cites Nickel & Kiela, 2017 source

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation
    § 4.2. Full Riemannian optimization · p. 7

    Previous work (Nickel & Kiela, 2017) optimizing word embeddings in the Poincaré ball used the retraction map R_x(v):=x+v as a first order approximation of exp_x(v).

    “Previous work (Nickel & Kiela, 2017) optimizing word embeddings in the Poincar´ e ball used the retraction map R x ( v ) := x + v as a first order approximation of exp x ( v ) .”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim1 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Nickel & Kiela, 2017 source

      Section 3.1 (p. 5) explicitly says the authors use the retraction Rθ(v) = θ + v for optimization in the Poincaré ball. The paper does not describe it in terms of an exponential-map approximation, and its Discussion (p. 8) treats models tailored to word embeddings as future work rather than the application optimized here. (LLM, conf=0.87)

      Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Findingnone given
    § 2.2. Hyperbolic geometry · p. 3

    Theorem 1 gives the unit-speed geodesic in D^n with given initial point and tangent vector.

    “Theorem 1. (Unit-speed geodesics) Let x ∈ D n and v ∈ T x D n (= R n ) such that g D x ( v, v ) = 1 . The unitspeed geodesic γ x,v : R + → D n with γ x,v (0) = x and ˙ γ x,v (0) = v is given by”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Findingnone given
    § 2.2. Hyperbolic geometry · p. 4

    Given any arbitrary geodesic in D^n, all its points are coplanar with the origin O.

    “Corollary 1.2. Given any arbitrary geodesic in D n , all its points are coplanar with the origin O .”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim. May combine two claims.

    Findingnone given
    § 1. Introduction · p. 2

    The proposed geodesically convex entailment cones are defined on a large class of Riemannian manifolds and induce a partial ordering relation in the embedding space.

    “We propose to replace the entailment regions O x of order-embeddings by a more efficient and generic class of objects, namely geodesically convex entailment cones . These cones are defined on a large class of Riemannian manifolds and induce a partial ordering relation in the embedding space.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
    • The authors state this as an assumption: Hierarchical relations can be modeled as partial orders defined using a family of nested geodesically convex cones.
    • The authors state this as an assumption: The optimal entailment cones should satisfy axial symmetry, rotation invariance, continuous aperture, and transitivity.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Findingreasoning
    § 2.2. Hyperbolic geometry · p. 3

    Corollary 1.1 gives the exponential map at a point x in D^n.

    “Corollary 1.1. (Exponential map) The exponential map at a point x ∈ D n , namely exp x : T x D n → D n , is given by”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data
    § 5. Experiments · p. 8

    The proposed hyperbolic cones outperform all baselines in all settings except the 0% setting, where order embeddings are better.

    “It can be seen that our hyperbolic cones are better than all the baselines in all settings, except in the 0% setting for which order embeddings are better.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
    • Rests on an assumption: The basic edges (transitive reduction) are hard to predict.
    • Rests on an assumption: The tree root carries little information and only has trivial edges to predict.
    • Rests on an assumption: The WordNet noun hierarchy exhibits a latent hierarchical structure.

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingreasoning
    § 3. Entailment Cones in the Poincar´ e Ball · p. 6

    Setting h constant gives both a restriction on ε in terms of K and a closed form expression for ψ.

    “which gives both a restriction on ϵ (in terms of K ):”
    • Also stated in: § 3. Entailment Cones in the Poincar´ e Ball · p. 6 · plain
      “as well as a closed form expression for ψ”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims. The quote only partly states this claim.

    Findingreasoning
    § 3. Entailment Cones in the Poincar´ e Ball · p. 6

    Theorem 5 gives an expression for the angle between the half-lines (xy and (0x for any x,y in D^n outside B^n(O,ε), and an equivalent expression of the Poincaré entailment cones satisfying Eq. 26.

    “Moreover, we have the following equivalent expression of the Poincar´ e entailment cones satisfying Eq. 26:”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
    • The authors state this as an assumption: The optimal entailment cones should satisfy axial symmetry, rotation invariance, continuous aperture, and transitivity.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Findingown data
    § 3. Entailment Cones in the Poincar´ e Ball · p. 6

    Figure 2 shows that transitivity is satisfied for some points on the border of the hypercones.

    “This figure also shows that transitivity is satisfied for some points on the border of the hypercones.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • The quote only partly states this claim.

    Findingreasoning
    § 3. Entailment Cones in the Poincar´ e Ball · p. 5

    Theorem 3 states that if transitivity holds, then the function h(r) is non-increasing.

    “Theorem 3. If transitivity holds, then the function”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
    • The authors state this as an assumption: The optimal entailment cones should satisfy axial symmetry, rotation invariance, continuous aperture, and transitivity.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims. The quote only partly states this claim.

    Findingreasoning
    § 3. Entailment Cones in the Poincar´ e Ball · p. 6

    One can adapt the above proofs to derive entailment cones in Euclidean space; in that case h(r)=r sin(ψ(r)) is non-decreasing, the optimal values of ψ are obtained for constant h equal to K ≤ ε, and a closed form expression follows.

    “One can easily adapt the above proofs to derive entailment cones in the Euclidean space ( R n , g E ) . The only adaptations are: i) replace the hyperbolic cosine law by usual Euclidean cosine law, ii) geodesics are straight lines, and iii) the exponential map is given by exp x ( v ) = x + v . Thus, one similarly obtains that h ( r ) = r sin( ψ ( r )) is non-decreasing, the optimal values of ψ are”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
    • The authors state this as an assumption: The optimal entailment cones should satisfy axial symmetry, rotation invariance, continuous aperture, and transitivity.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation
    § 2.2. Hyperbolic geometry · p. 4

    The hyperbolic laws of cosines and sines hold in the Poincaré ball.

    “Then, the hyperbolic laws of cosines and sines hold respectively”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Parkkonen, 2013

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation
    § 2.2. Hyperbolic geometry · p. 4

    Euclidean space R^n for n ≥ 2 is not δ-hyperbolic for any δ ≥ 0, while the Poincaré ball D^n is log(1+√2)-hyperbolic.

    “For instance, the Euclidean space R n for n ≥ 2 is not δ -hyperbolic for any δ ≥ 0 , while the Poincar´ e ball D n is log(1+ √ 2) -hyperbolic.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 2 sources checked
    • cites Gromov, 1987 source
    • cites Bowditch, 2006 source

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation
    § 2.2. Hyperbolic geometry · p. 3

    The hyperbolic space is complete as a metric space, guaranteeing that D^n is geodesically complete.

    “We know from the Hopf-Rinow theorem that the hyperbolic space is complete as a metric space. This guarantees that D n is geodesically complete.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Hopf-Rinow theorem

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation
    § 1. Introduction · p. 1

    The entailment regions O_x of order embeddings suffer from heavy intersections, implying that their disjoint volumes rapidly become bounded.

    “Moreover, the regions O x suffer from heavy intersections, implying that their disjoint volumes rapidly become bounded 2 .”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S4 (based). May combine two claims.

    Premisenone given
    § 3. Entailment Cones in the Poincar´ e Ball · p. 5

    For hyperbolic space models the injectivity radius of the tangent space at any point is infinite, thus no restriction is needed.

    “Note that for hyperbolic space models the injectivity radius of the tangent space at any point is infinite, thus no restriction is needed.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
    • The authors state this as an assumption: The exponential map should be injective.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation
    § 2.2. Hyperbolic geometry · p. 3

    The hyperbolic space has five models which are isometric to each other and conformal to the Euclidean space.

    “The hyperbolic space has five models which are often insightful to work in. They are isometric to each other and conformal to the Euclidean space (Cannon et al., 1997; Parkkonen, 2013) 4 .”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 2 sources checked
    • cites Cannon et al., 1997 source
    • cites Parkkonen, 2013

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning
    § 1. Introduction · p. 1

    Representing wide and deep hierarchical structures in a bounded region of Euclidean space would cause many points to end up undesirably close to each other, so Euclidean distances would no longer reflect the original tree metric.

    “As a consequence, representing wide (with high branching factor) and deep hierarchical structures in a bounded region of the Euclidean space would cause many points to end up undesirably close to each other. This also implies that Euclidean distances would no longer be capable of reflecting the original tree metric.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisenone given
    § 2.2. Hyperbolic geometry · p. 3

    Geodesics in D^n are all intersections of the Euclidean unit ball D^n with (degenerated) Euclidean circles orthogonal to the unit sphere ∂D^n.

    “Geodesics in D n are all intersections of the Euclidean unit ball D n with (degenerated) Euclidean circles orthogonal to the unit sphere ∂ D n (equations are derived below).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation
    § 2.2. Hyperbolic geometry · p. 3

    The hyperbolic space of dimension n ≥ 2 is uniquely characterized as a complete, simply connected Riemannian manifold with constant negative curvature.

    “It is (up to isometry) uniquely characterized as a complete, simply connected Riemannian manifold with constant negative curvature (Cannon et al., 1997).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Cannon et al., 1997 source

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Interpretationreasoning
    § 3. Entailment Cones in the Poincar´ e Ball · p. 6

    In the Euclidean case, there is no need to be concerned about Riemannian optimization, as the usual Euclidean gradient-step is used.

    “From a learning perspective, there is no need to be concerned about the Riemannian optimization described in Section 4.2, as the usual Euclidean gradient-step is used in this case.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Interpretationreasoning
    § 3. Entailment Cones in the Poincar´ e Ball · p. 6

    Since we are interested in cones with an aperture as large as possible, it is natural to set all terms h(r) equal to K := h(ε), i.e. to make h constant.

    “Since we are interested in cones with an aperture as large as possible (to maximize model capacity), it is natural to set all terms h ( r ) equal to K := h ( ϵ ) , i.e. to make h constant:”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
    • The authors state this as an assumption: Cones should have an aperture as large as possible to maximize model capacity.
27 of 27

  • The authors state this as an assumption.

    The origin should entail the entire space D^n, i.e. S_0 = D^n.

    “we first note that the origin should 'entail' the entire space D n , i.e. S 0 = D n .”

  • The authors state this as an assumption.

    Cones should have an aperture as large as possible to maximize model capacity.

    “Since we are interested in cones with an aperture as large as possible (to maximize model capacity)”

  • The authors state this as an assumption.

    The exponential map should be injective.

    “Note that, in the above definition, we desire that the exponential map be injective.”

  • The authors state this as an assumption.

    Hierarchical relations can be modeled as partial orders defined using a family of nested geodesically convex cones.

    “we view hierarchical relations as partial orders defined using a family of nested geodesically convex cones.”

  • The authors state this as an assumption.

    The optimal entailment cones should satisfy axial symmetry, rotation invariance, continuous aperture, and transitivity.

    “we want the definition of cones to exhibit the following four intuitive properties detailed below.”

  • The paper relies on this without support.

    The basic edges (transitive reduction) are hard to predict.

    “These edges are hard to predict, so we will always include them in the training set.”

  • The paper relies on this without support.

    The tree root carries little information and only has trivial edges to predict.

    “We remove the tree root since it carries little information and only has trivial edges to predict.”

  • The paper relies on this without support.

    Hyperbolic geometry is powerful for embedding hierarchical structures.

    “Hyperbolic geometry has proven to be powerful for embedding hierarchical structures.”

  • The paper relies on this without support.

    The WordNet noun hierarchy exhibits a latent hierarchical structure.

    “We evaluate the representational and generalization power of hyperbolic entailment cones and of other baselines using data that exhibits a latent hierarchical structure.”
9 of 9

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?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. Bl¨ asius, T., Friedrich, T., Krohmer, A., and Laue, S. Efficient embedding of scale-free graphs in the hyperbolic plane. In LIPIcs-Leibniz International Proceedings in Informatics , volume 57. Schloss Dagstuhl-Leibniz-Zentrum fuer Informatik, 2016.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Ganea, O.-E., Bécigneul, G., & Hofmann, T.
Affiliations
ETH Zurich (CH)
ORCID
Hofmann, Thomas
Venue
arXiv
Publisher
arXiv
Published
2018
Volume
4
Pages
1646-1655
ISSN
2331-8422 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.48550/arxiv.1804.01882
arXiv
1804.01882
OpenAlex
W2796314760
Cited by
115
References
31
Citations by year
2025: 7 · 2024: 18 · 2023: 15 · 2022: 15 · 2021: 22 · 2020: 19 · 2019: 16 · 2018: 3
Type
posted content
Language
en
Open access
Licence
arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
Locations
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University)
  • International Conference on Machine Learning
Funders
  • National Science Foundation
  • Schweizerischer Nationalfonds zur Förderung der Wissenschaftlichen Forschung (167176)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Advanced Graph Neural Networks
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computational Theory and Mathematics › Topological and Geometric Data Analysis
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Neural Networks and Applications
Keywords
hyperbolic embeddings, directed acyclic graphs, hierarchical embedding, partially ordered sets, graph representation learning, tree-like structures, hyperbolic geometry

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