Papers
Topics
Authors
Recent
Gemini 2.5 Flash
Gemini 2.5 Flash
97 tokens/sec
GPT-4o
53 tokens/sec
Gemini 2.5 Pro Pro
43 tokens/sec
o3 Pro
4 tokens/sec
GPT-4.1 Pro
47 tokens/sec
DeepSeek R1 via Azure Pro
28 tokens/sec
2000 character limit reached

Soft Marginal TransE for Scholarly Knowledge Graph Completion (1904.12211v1)

Published 27 Apr 2019 in cs.AI, cs.IR, and cs.LG

Abstract: Knowledge graphs (KGs), i.e. representation of information as a semantic graph, provide a significant test bed for many tasks including question answering, recommendation, and link prediction. Various amount of scholarly metadata have been made vailable as knowledge graphs from the diversity of data providers and agents. However, these high-quantities of data remain far from quality criteria in terms of completeness while growing at a rapid pace. Most of the attempts in completing such KGs are following traditional data digitization, harvesting and collaborative curation approaches. Whereas, advanced AI-related approaches such as embedding models - specifically designed for such tasks - are usually evaluated for standard benchmarks such as Freebase and Wordnet. The tailored nature of such datasets prevents those approaches to shed the lights on more accurate discoveries. Application of such models on domain-specific KGs takes advantage of enriched meta-data and provides accurate results where the underlying domain can enormously benefit. In this work, the TransE embedding model is reconciled for a specific link prediction task on scholarly metadata. The results show a significant shift in the accuracy and performance evaluation of the model on a dataset with scholarly metadata. The newly proposed version of TransE obtains 99.9% for link prediction task while original TransE gets 95%. In terms of accuracy and Hit@10, TransE outperforms other embedding models such as ComplEx, TransH and TransR experimented over scholarly knowledge graphs

User Edit Pencil Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com
Authors (4)
  1. Mojtaba Nayyeri (29 papers)
  2. Sahar Vahdati (19 papers)
  3. Jens Lehmann (80 papers)
  4. Hamed Shariat Yazdi (7 papers)
Citations (14)

Summary

We haven't generated a summary for this paper yet.