CoChat
Sign Up
PreprintCited by 6Topic ModelingAdvanced Graph Neural NetworksSemantic Web and Ontologies

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

Research Trends for the Interplay between Large Language Models and Knowledge Graphs

Open access
Khorashadizadeh, Hanieh, Amara, Fatima Zahra, Ezzabady, Morteza, Ieng, Frédéric, Tiwari, Sanju, Mihindukulasooriya, Nandana, Groppe, Jinghua, Sahri, Soror, Benamara, Farah, Groppe, Sven·2024·arXiv
DOI 10.48550/arxiv.2406.08223arXiv 2406.08223
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

This survey investigates the synergistic relationship between Large Language Models (LLMs) and Knowledge Graphs (KGs), which is crucial for advancing AI's capabilities in understanding, reasoning, and language processing. It aims to address gaps in current research by exploring areas such as KG Question Answering, ontology generation, KG validation, and the enhancement of KG accuracy and consistency through LLMs. The paper further examines the roles of LLMs in generating descriptive texts and natural language queries for KGs. Through a structured analysis that includes categorizing LLM-KG interactions, examining methodologies, and investigating collaborative uses and potential biases, this study seeks to provide new insights into the combined potential of LLMs and KGs. It highlights the importance of their interaction for improving AI applications and outlines future research directions.

Overview

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

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

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

Integrity signals

Registry

DataCite · 10.48550/arxiv.2406.08223

Cites

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

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

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

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

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?

Self-check

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

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

Citations

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

Cited by 6

Research works printed but not linked: 90

  1. Kosuke Aigo, Takashi Tsunakawa, Masafumi Nishida, and Masafumi Nishimura. 2021. Question generation using knowledge graphs with the T5 language model and masked self-attention. In GCCE. IEEE.
  2. Mehwish Alam, Frank van Harmelen, and Maribel Acosta. 2023. Towards Seman- tically Enriched Embeddings for Knowledge Graph Completion. arXiv preprint arXiv:2308.00081 (2023). · arXiv
  3. Dhananjay Ashok and Zachary C Lipton. 2023. PromptNER: Prompting For Named Entity Recognition. arXiv preprint arXiv:2305.15444 (2023). · arXiv
  4. Jinheon Baek, Alham Fikri Aji, and Amir Saffari. 2023. Knowledge-Augmented Language Model Prompting for Zero-Shot Knowledge Graph Question Answer- ing. arXiv preprint arXiv:2306.04136 (2023). · arXiv
  5. Teodoro Baldazzi, Luigi Bellomarini, Stefano Ceri, Andrea Colombo, Andrea Gentili, and Emanuel Sallinger. 2023. Fine-tuning Large Enterprise Language Models via Ontological Reasoning. arXiv:2306.10723 (2023). · arXiv
  6. Yejin Bang, Samuel Cahyawijaya, Nayeon Lee, Wenliang Dai, Dan Su, Bryan Wilie, Holy Lovenia, Ziwei Ji, Tiezheng Yu, Willy Chung, et al. 2023. A multitask, multilingual, multimodal evaluation of chatgpt on reasoning, hallucination, and interactivity. arXiv preprint arXiv:2302.04023 (2023). · arXiv
  7. Russa Biswas, Radina Sofronova, Mehwish Alam, and Harald Sack. 2021. Contextual Language Models for Knowledge Graph Completion. In MLSMKG@PKDD/ECML.
  8. Antoine Bordes, Nicolas Usunier, Alberto Garcia-Duran, Jason Weston, and Oksana Yakhnenko. 2013. Translating embeddings for modeling multi-relational data. Advances in neural information processing systems 26 (2013).
  9. Xing Cao and Yun Liu. 2023. ReLMKG: reasoning with pre-trained language mod- els and knowledge graphs for complex question answering. Applied Intelligence 53, 10 (2023), 12032-12046.
  10. J Harry Caufield, Harshad Hegde, Vincent Emonet, Nomi L Harris, Marcin P Joachimiak, Nicolas Matentzoglu, HyeongSik Kim, Sierra AT Moxon, Justin T Reese, Melissa A Haendel, et al. 2023. Structured prompt interrogation and recursive extraction of semantics (SPIRES): A method for populating knowledge bases using zero-shot learning. arXiv:2304.02711 (2023). · arXiv
  11. Daniel T Chang. 2023. Concept-Oriented Deep Learning with Large Language Models. arXiv preprint arXiv:2306.17089 (2023). · arXiv
  12. Canyu Chen and Kai Shu. 2023. Can llm-generated misinformation be detected? arXiv:2309.13788 (2023). · arXiv
  13. Canyu Chen and Kai Shu. 2023. Combating misinformation in the age of llms: Opportunities and challenges. arXiv preprint arXiv:2311.05656 (2023). · arXiv
  14. Chen Chen, Yufei Wang, Bing Li, and Kwok-Yan Lam. 2022. Knowledge is flat: A seq2seq generative framework for various knowledge graph completion. arXiv preprint arXiv:2209.07299 (2022). · arXiv
  15. Wenhu Chen, Yu Su, Xifeng Yan, and William Yang Wang. 2020. KGPT: Knowledge-grounded pre-training for data-to-text generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:2010.02307 (2020). · arXiv
  16. Xiaojun Chen, Shengbin Jia, and Yang Xiang. 2020. A review: Knowledge rea- soning over knowledge graph. Expert Systems with Applications 141 (2020), 112948.
  17. I Chern, Steffi Chern, Shiqi Chen, Weizhe Yuan, Kehua Feng, Chunting Zhou, Junxian He, Graham Neubig, Pengfei Liu, et al. 2023. FacTool: Factuality Detection in Generative AI-A Tool Augmented Framework for Multi-Task and Multi- Domain Scenarios. arXiv preprint arXiv:2307.13528 (2023). · arXiv
  18. Tsun-Hin Cheung and Kin-Man Lam. 2023. FactLLaMA: Optimizing Instruction- Following Language Models with External Knowledge for Automated Fact- Checking. In APSIPA ASC. IEEE.
  19. Nurendra Choudhary and Chandan K Reddy. 2023. Complex logical rea- soning over knowledge graphs using large language models. arXiv preprint arXiv:2305.01157 (2023). · arXiv
  20. Anthony Colas, Mehrdad Alvandipour, and Daisy Zhe Wang. 2022. GAP: A graph- aware language model framework for knowledge graph-to-text generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:2204.06674 (2022). · arXiv
  21. Matthias Droop, Markus Flarer, Jinghua Groppe, Sven Groppe, Volker Linnemann, Jakob Pinggera, Florian Santner, Michael Schier, Felix Schöpf, Hannes Staffler, and Stefan Zugal. 2007. Translating XPath Queries into SPARQL Queries. In On the Move to Meaningful Internet Systems 2007: OTM Workshops, OTM Confederated International Workshops and Posters, AWeSOMe, CAMS, OTM Academy Doctoral Consortium, MONET, OnToContent, ORM, PerSys, PPN, RDDS, SSWS, and SWWS, Vilamoura, Portugal. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-76888-3_5 · DOI
  22. Matthias Droop, Markus Flarer, Jinghua Groppe, Sven Groppe, Volker Linne- mann, Jakob Pinggera, Florian Santner, Michael Schier, Felix Schöpf, Hannes Staffler, and Stefan Zugal. 2008. Bringing the XML and Semantic Web Worlds Closer: Transforming XML into RDF and Embedding XPath into SPARQL. In 10th International Conference on Enterprise Information Systems (ICEIS), Barcelona, Spain, Revised Selected Papers. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-00670-8_3 · DOI
  23. Matthias Droop, Markus Flarer, Jinghua Groppe, Sven Groppe, Volker Linnemann, Jakob Pinggera, Florian Santner, Michael Schier, Felix Schöpf, Hannes Staffler, and Stefan Zugal. 2008. Embedding Xpath Queries into SPARQL Queries. In Proceedings of the Tenth International Conference on Enterprise Information Systems (ICEIS), Barcelona, Spain.
  24. Darren Edge, Ha Trinh, Newman Cheng, Joshua Bradley, Alex Chao, Apurva Mody, Steven Truitt, and Jonathan Larson. 2024. From local to global: A graph rag approach to query-focused summarization. arXiv preprint arXiv:2404.16130 (2024). · arXiv
  25. Romina Etezadi and Mehrnoush Shamsfard. 2023. The state of the art in open domain complex question answering: a survey. Applied Intelligence 53, 4 (2023), 4124-4144.
  26. Morteza Kamaladdini Ezzabady, Frédéric Ieng, Hanieh Khorashadizadeh, Farah Benamara, Sven Groppe, and Soror Sahri. 2024. Towards Generating High- Quality Knowledge Graphs by Leveraging Large Language Models. In The 29th Annual International Conference on Natural Language & Information Systems (NLDB 2024), Turin, Italy.
  27. Maurice Funk, Simon Hosemann, Jean Christoph Jung, and Carsten Lutz. 2023. Towards Ontology Construction with Language Models. arXiv preprint arXiv:2309.09898 (2023). · arXiv
  28. Yunfan Gao, Yun Xiong, Xinyu Gao, Kangxiang Jia, Jinliu Pan, Yuxi Bi, Yi Dai, Jiawei Sun, and Haofen Wang. 2023. Retrieval-augmented generation for large language models: A survey. arXiv preprint arXiv:2312.10997 (2023). · arXiv
  29. Peizhu Gong, Jin Liu, Yihe Yang, and Huihua He. 2020. Towards Knowledge Enhanced Language Model for Machine Reading Comprehension. IEEE Access 8 (2020), 224837-224851. · DOI
  30. Jinghua Groppe and Sven Groppe. 2006. A Prototype of a Schema-Based XPath Satisfiability Tester. In 17th International Conference on Database and Expert Systems Applications (DEXA), Kraków, Poland. https://doi.org/10.1007/11827405_ 10 · DOI
  31. Jinghua Groppe and Sven Groppe. 2006. Satisfiability-Test, Rewriting and Re- finement of Users' XPath Queries According to XML Schema Definitions. In 10th East European Conference on Advances in Databases and Information Systems (ADBIS), Thessaloniki, Greece. https://doi.org/10.1007/11827252_5 · DOI
  32. Jinghua Groppe and Sven Groppe. 2008. Filtering unsatisfiable XPath queries. Data Knowl. Eng. 64, 1 (2008), 134-169. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.datak.2007.06. 018 · DOI
  33. Jinghua Groppe, Sven Groppe, and Jan Kolbaum. 2009. Optimization of SPARQL by using coreSPARQL. In Proceedings of the 11th International Conference on Enterprise Information Systems (ICEIS), Milan, Italy. https://doi.org/10.5220/ 0001983501070112 · DOI
  34. Sven Groppe, Stefan Böttcher, Georg Birkenheuer, and André Höing. 2006. Re- formulating XPath queries and XSLT queries on XSLT views. Data Knowl. Eng. 57, 1 (2006), 64-110. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.datak.2005.04.002 · DOI
  35. Sven Groppe, Stefan Böttcher, and Jinghua Groppe. 2006. XPath Query Simpli- fication with regard to the Elimination of Intersect and Except Operators. In Proceedings of the 22nd International Conference on Data Engineering Workshops (ICDEW), Atlanta, GA, USA. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICDEW.2006.165 · DOI
  36. Sven Groppe, Jinghua Groppe, Niklas Klein, Ralf Bettentrupp, Stefan Böttcher, and Le Gruenwald. 2011. Transforming XSLT stylesheets into XQuery expres- sions and vice versa. Computer Languages, Systems & Structures 37, 2 (2011), 76-111. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cl.2010.11.001 · DOI
  37. Sven Groppe, Jinghua Groppe, Volker Linnemann, Dirk Kukulenz, Nils Hoeller, and Christoph Reinke. 2008. Embedding SPARQL into XQuery/XSLT. In Proceed- ings of the 2008 ACM Symposium on Applied Computing (SAC), Fortaleza, Ceara, Brazil. http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/1363686.1364228 · DOI
  38. Sven Groppe, Jana Neumann, and Volker Linnemann. 2009. SWOBE -embedding the semantic web languages RDF, SPARQL and SPARUL into java for guarantee- ing type safety, for checking the satisfiability of queries and for the determination of query result types. In Proceedings of the 2009 ACM Symposium on Applied Computing (SAC), Honolulu, Hawaii, USA. http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/1529282. 1529561 · DOI
  39. Linmei Hu, Zeyi Liu, Ziwang Zhao, Lei Hou, Liqiang Nie, and Juanzi Li. 2023. A survey of knowledge enhanced pre-trained language models. IEEE Transactions on Knowledge and Data Engineering (2023).
  40. Jiaxin Huang, Chunyuan Li, Krishan Subudhi, Damien Jose, Shobana Balakrish- nan, Weizhu Chen, Baolin Peng, Jianfeng Gao, and Jiawei Han. 2020. Few-shot named entity recognition: A comprehensive study. arXiv:2012.14978 (2020). · arXiv
  41. Pere-Lluís Huguet Cabot and Roberto Navigli. 2021. REBEL: Relation Extraction By End-to-end Language generation. In EMNLP 2021. https://doi.org/10.18653/ v1/2021.findings-emnlp.204 · DOI · Paper page
  42. Zizheng Ji, Lin Dai, Jin Pang, and Tingting Shen. 2020. Leveraging Concept- Enhanced Pre-Training Model and Masked-Entity Language Model for Named Entity Disambiguation. IEEE Access 8 (2020). · DOI
  43. Pei Ke, Haozhe Ji, Yu Ran, Xin Cui, Liwei Wang, Linfeng Song, Xiaoyan Zhu, and Minlie Huang. 2021. Jointgt: Graph-text joint representation learning for text generation from knowledge graphs. arXiv preprint arXiv:2106.10502 (2021). · arXiv
  44. Hanieh Khorashadizadeh, Nandana Mihindukulasooriya, Sanju Tiwari, Jinghua Groppe, and Sven Groppe. 2023. Exploring In-Context Learning Capabil- ities of Foundation Models for Generating Knowledge Graphs from Text. arXiv:2305.08804 [cs.CL] · arXiv
  45. Bosung Kim, Taesuk Hong, Youngjoong Ko, and Jungyun Seo. 2020. Multi-task learning for knowledge graph completion with pre-trained language models. In Proceedings of the COLING.
  46. Jiho Kim, Yeonsu Kwon, Yohan Jo, and Edward Choi. 2023. Kg-gpt: A general framework for reasoning on knowledge graphs using large language models. arXiv preprint arXiv:2310.11220 (2023). · arXiv
  47. Takeshi Kojima, Shixiang Shane Gu, Machel Reid, Yutaka Matsuo, and Yusuke Iwasawa. 2023. Large Language Models are Zero-Shot Reasoners. http://arxiv. org/abs/2205.11916 arXiv:2205.11916 [cs]. · arXiv
  48. Lukáš Korel, Uladzislau Yorsh, Alexander S Behr, Norbert Kockmann, and Martin Holeňa. 2023. Text-to-Ontology Mapping via Natural Language Processing with Application to Search for Relevant Ontologies in Catalysis. Computers 12, 1 (2023), 14.
  49. Yunshi Lan, Gaole He, Jinhao Jiang, Jing Jiang, Wayne Xin Zhao, and Ji-Rong Wen. 2021. A survey on complex knowledge base question answering: Methods, challenges and solutions. arXiv:2105.11644 (2021). · arXiv
  50. Mike Lewis, Yinhan Liu, Naman Goyal, Marjan Ghazvininejad, Abdelrahman Mohamed, Omer Levy, Veselin Stoyanov, and Luke Zettlemoyer. 2020. BART: Denoising Sequence-to-Sequence Pre-training for Natural Language Generation, Translation, and Comprehension. In Proceedings of ACL 2020. Online. · DOI · Paper page
  51. Guozheng Li, Peng Wang, and Wenjun Ke. 2023. Revisiting Large Language Models as Zero-shot Relation Extractors. http://arxiv.org/abs/2310.05028 arXiv:2310.05028 [cs]. · arXiv
  52. Junpeng Li, Zixia Jia, and Zilong Zheng. 2023. Semi-automatic Data Enhancement for Document-Level Relation Extraction with Distant Supervision from Large Language Models. arXiv:2311.07314[cs]. · arXiv
  53. Junyi Li, Tianyi Tang, Wayne Xin Zhao, Zhicheng Wei, Nicholas Jing Yuan, and Ji-Rong Wen. 2021. Few-shot knowledge graph-to-text generation with pretrained language models. arXiv preprint arXiv:2106.01623 (2021). · arXiv
  54. Zhenping Li, Zhen Cao, Pengfei Li, Yong Zhong, and Shaobo Li. 2023. Multi- Hop Question Generation with Knowledge Graph-Enhanced Language Model. Applied Sciences 13, 9 (2023), 5765.
  55. Yankai Lin, Zhiyuan Liu, Maosong Sun, Yang Liu, and Xuan Zhu. 2015. Learning entity and relation embeddings for knowledge graph completion. In Proceedings of the AAAI conference.
  56. Weijie Liu, Peng Zhou, Zhe Zhao, Zhiruo Wang, Qi Ju, Haotang Deng, and Ping Wang. 2020. K-bert: Enabling language representation with knowledge graph. In Proceedings of the AAAI Conference.
  57. Linhao Luo, Jiaxin Ju, Bo Xiong, Yuan-Fang Li, Gholamreza Haffari, and Shirui Pan. 2023. ChatRule: Mining Logical Rules with Large Language Models for Knowledge Graph Reasoning. ArXiv abs/2309.01538 (2023). · arXiv
  58. Linhao Luo, Yuan-Fang Li, Gholamreza Haffari, and Shirui Pan. 2023. Reasoning on graphs: Faithful and interpretable large language model reasoning. arXiv preprint arXiv:2310.01061 (2023). · arXiv
  59. Kevin Meng, David Bau, Alex Andonian, and Yonatan Belinkov. 2022. Locating and Editing Factual Associations in GPT. In Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 35.
  60. Fabian Neuhaus. 2023. Ontologies in the era of large language models-a per- spective. Applied Ontology 18, 4 (2023), 399-407.
  61. Reham Omar, Omij Mangukiya, Panos Kalnis, and Essam Mansour. 2023. Chat- gpt versus traditional question answering for knowledge graphs: Current sta- tus and future directions towards knowledge graph chatbots. arXiv preprint arXiv:2302.06466 (2023). · arXiv
  62. Long Ouyang, Jeff Wu, Xu Jiang, Diogo Almeida, Carroll L Wainwright, Pamela Mishkin, Chong Zhang, Sandhini Agarwal, Katarina Slama, Alex Ray, et al. 2022. Training language models to follow instructions with human feedback, 2022. URL https://arxiv. org/abs/2203.02155 13 (2022).
  63. Jeff Z Pan, Simon Razniewski, Jan-Christoph Kalo, Sneha Singhania, Jiaoyan Chen, Stefan Dietze, Hajira Jabeen, Janna Omeliyanenko, Wen Zhang, Matteo Lissandrini, et al. 2023. Large language models and knowledge graphs: Opportu- nities and challenges. arXiv preprint arXiv:2308.06374 (2023). · arXiv
  64. Shirui Pan, Linhao Luo, Yufei Wang, Chen Chen, Jiapu Wang, and Xindong Wu. 2024. Unifying large language models and knowledge graphs: A roadmap. IEEE TKDE (2024).
  65. Leonardo FR Ribeiro, Martin Schmitt, Hinrich Schütze, and Iryna Gurevych. 2020. Investigating pretrained language models for graph-to-text generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:2007.08426 (2020). · arXiv
  66. Md Rashad Al Hasan Rony, Uttam Kumar, Roman Teucher, Liubov Kovriguina, and Jens Lehmann. 2022. SGPT: a generative approach for SPARQL query generation from natural language questions. IEEE Access (2022).
  67. Mohammed Saeed, Nicola De Cao, and Paolo Papotti. 2023. Querying Large Language Models with SQL. arXiv preprint arXiv:2304.00472 (2023). · arXiv
  68. Marion Schaeffer, Matthias Sesboüé, Jean-Philippe Kotowicz, Nicolas Delestre, and Cecilia Zanni-Merk. 2023. OLAF: An Ontology Learning Applied Framework. Procedia Computer Science 225 (2023), 2106-2115.
  69. Henry Shevlin, Karina Vold, Matthew Crosby, and Marta Halina. 2019. The limits of machine intelligence. EMBO reports 20, 10 (2019), e49177. https: //doi.org/10.15252/embr.201949177 · DOI
  70. Jana Straková, Eva Fučíková, Jan Hajič, and Zdeňka Urešová. 2023. Extending an Event-type Ontology: Adding Verbs and Classes Using Fine-tuned LLMs Suggestions. arXiv:2306.02130 (2023). · arXiv
  71. Théo Trouillon, Johannes Welbl, Sebastian Riedel, Éric Gaussier, and Guillaume Bouchard. 2016. Complex embeddings for simple link prediction. In International conference on machine learning. PMLR.
  72. Somin Wadhwa, Silvio Amir, and Byron C. Wallace. 2023. Revisiting Relation Extraction in the era of Large Language Models. http://arxiv.org/abs/2305.05003 arXiv:2305.05003[cs]. · arXiv
  73. Zhen Wan, Fei Cheng, Zhuoyuan Mao, Qianying Liu, Haiyue Song, Jiwei Li, and Sadao Kurohashi. 2023. GPT-RE: In-context Learning for Relation Extraction using Large Language Models. arXiv:2305.02105 [cs]. · arXiv
  74. Bo Wang, Tao Shen, Guodong Long, Tianyi Zhou, Ying Wang, and Yi Chang. 2021. Structure-augmented text representation learning for efficient knowledge graph completion. In Web Conference.
  75. Chenguang Wang, Xiao Liu, Zui Chen, Haoyun Hong, Jie Tang, and Dawn Song. 2023. DeepStruct: Pretraining of Language Models for Structure Prediction. arXiv:2205.10475 [cs]. · arXiv
  76. Liang Wang, Wei Zhao, Zhuoyu Wei, and Jingming Liu. 2022. SimKGC: Simple contrastive knowledge graph completion with pre-trained language models. arXiv preprint arXiv:2203.02167 (2022). · arXiv
  77. Xiangyu Wang, Lyuzhou Chen, Taiyu Ban, Muhammad Usman, Yifeng Guan, Shikang Liu, Tianhao Wu, and Huanhuan Chen. 2021. Knowledge graph quality control: A survey. Fundamental Research 1, 5 (2021), 607-626.
  78. Xintao Wang, Qianwen Yang, Yongting Qiu, Jiaqing Liang, Qianyu He, Zhouhong Gu, Yanghua Xiao, and Wei Wang. 2023. Knowledgpt: Enhancing large language models with retrieval and storage access on knowledge bases. arXiv preprint arXiv:2308.11761 (2023). · arXiv
  79. Xiang Wei, Xingyu Cui, Ning Cheng, Xiaobin Wang, Xin Zhang, Shen Huang, Pengjun Xie, Jinan Xu, Yufeng Chen, Meishan Zhang, Yong Jiang, and Wen- juan Han. 2023. Zero-Shot Information Extraction via Chatting with ChatGPT. arXiv:2302.10205 [cs]. · arXiv
  80. Yanbin Wei, Qiushi Huang, Yu Zhang, and James Kwok. 2023. KICGPT: Large Language Model with Knowledge in Context for Knowledge Graph Completion. In EMNLP.
  81. Xin Xie, Ningyu Zhang, Zhoubo Li, Shumin Deng, Hui Chen, Feiyu Xiong, Mosha Chen, and Huajun Chen. 2022. From discrimination to generation: Knowledge graph completion with generative transformer. In Companion Proceedings of the Web Conference.
  82. Wenwen Xu, Mingzhe Fang, Li Yang, Huaxi Jiang, Geng Liang, and Chun Zuo. 2021. Enabling language representation with knowledge graph and structured semantic information. In CCAI. IEEE.
  83. Xin Xu, Yuqi Zhu, Xiaohan Wang, and Ningyu Zhang. 2023. How to Un- leash the Power of Large Language Models for Few-shot Relation Extraction? arXiv:2305.01555 [cs]. · arXiv
  84. Linyao Yang, Hongyang Chen, Zhao Li, Xiao Ding, and Xindong Wu. 2024. Give Us the Facts: Enhancing Large Language Models with Knowledge Graphs for Fact-aware Language Modeling. arXiv:2306.11489 [cs.CL] · arXiv
  85. Zhilin Yang, Peng Qi, Saizheng Zhang, Yoshua Bengio, William W Cohen, Ruslan Salakhutdinov, and Christopher D Manning. 2018. HotpotQA: A dataset for diverse, explainable multi-hop question answering. arXiv:1809.09600 (2018). · arXiv
  86. Liang Yao, Chengsheng Mao, and Yuan Luo. 2019. KG-BERT: BERT for knowledge graph completion. arXiv preprint arXiv:1909.03193 (2019). · arXiv
  87. Wenhao Yu, Chenguang Zhu, Yuwei Fang, Donghan Yu, Shuohang Wang, Yi- chong Xu, Michael Zeng, and Meng Jiang. 2022. Dict-BERT: Enhancing Language Model Pre-training with Dictionary. In ACL.
  88. Chenhan Yuan, Qianqian Xie, and Sophia Ananiadou. 2023. Zero-shot Tem- poral Relation Extraction with ChatGPT. http://arxiv.org/abs/2304.05454 arXiv:2304.05454 [cs]. · arXiv
  89. Amrapali Zaveri, Anisa Rula, Andrea Maurino, Ricardo Pietrobon, Jens Lehmann, and Soeren Auer. 2016. Quality assessment for linked data: A survey. Semantic Web 7, 1 (2016), 63-93.
  90. Wenxuan Zhou, Sheng Zhang, Yu Gu, Muhao Chen, and Hoifung Poon. 2023. Universalner: Targeted distillation from large language models for open named entity recognition. arXiv:2308.03279 (2023). · arXiv

Metadata

Authors
Khorashadizadeh, H., Amara, F. Z., Ezzabady, M., Ieng, F., Tiwari, S., Mihindukulasooriya, N., Groppe, J., Sahri, S., Benamara, F., & Groppe, S.
Affiliations
  • University of Lübeck (DE)
  • Abbès Laghrour University of Khenchela (DZ)
  • Université de Toulouse (FR)
  • Université Paris Cité (FR)
  • Alliance University (IN)
  • IBM (United States) (US)
  • Institute for Infocomm Research (SG)
ORCID
Venue
arXiv
Publisher
arXiv
Published
2024
ISSN
2331-8422 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.48550/arxiv.2406.08223
arXiv
2406.08223
OpenAlex
W4399657455
Cited by
6
References
0
Citations by year
2025: 5 · 2024: 1
Type
posted content
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • HAL (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (cc-by)
Funders
Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (490998901)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Topic Modeling
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Advanced Graph Neural Networks
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Semantic Web and Ontologies
Keywords
large language models, knowledge graphs, knowledge graph question answering, ontology construction, knowledge graph validation, natural language query generation

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review