Papers
Topics
Authors
Recent
Gemini 2.5 Flash
Gemini 2.5 Flash
139 tokens/sec
GPT-4o
47 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

Adapting Neural Link Predictors for Data-Efficient Complex Query Answering (2301.12313v3)

Published 29 Jan 2023 in cs.LG, cs.AI, cs.LO, and cs.NE

Abstract: Answering complex queries on incomplete knowledge graphs is a challenging task where a model needs to answer complex logical queries in the presence of missing knowledge. Prior work in the literature has proposed to address this problem by designing architectures trained end-to-end for the complex query answering task with a reasoning process that is hard to interpret while requiring data and resource-intensive training. Other lines of research have proposed re-using simple neural link predictors to answer complex queries, reducing the amount of training data by orders of magnitude while providing interpretable answers. The neural link predictor used in such approaches is not explicitly optimised for the complex query answering task, implying that its scores are not calibrated to interact together. We propose to address these problems via CQD${\mathcal{A}}$, a parameter-efficient score \emph{adaptation} model optimised to re-calibrate neural link prediction scores for the complex query answering task. While the neural link predictor is frozen, the adaptation component -- which only increases the number of model parameters by $0.03\%$ -- is trained on the downstream complex query answering task. Furthermore, the calibration component enables us to support reasoning over queries that include atomic negations, which was previously impossible with link predictors. In our experiments, CQD${\mathcal{A}}$ produces significantly more accurate results than current state-of-the-art methods, improving from $34.4$ to $35.1$ Mean Reciprocal Rank values averaged across all datasets and query types while using $\leq 30\%$ of the available training query types. We further show that CQD${\mathcal{A}}$ is data-efficient, achieving competitive results with only $1\%$ of the training complex queries, and robust in out-of-domain evaluations.

Definition Search Book Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com
References (48)
  1. Lowfer: Low-rank bilinear pooling for link prediction. In International Conference on Machine Learning, pages 257–268. PMLR, 2020.
  2. Complex query answering with neural link predictors. In ICLR. OpenReview.net, 2021.
  3. DBpedia: A nucleus for a web of open data. In ISWC/ASWC, volume 4825 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 722–735. Springer, 2007.
  4. Tucker: Tensor factorization for knowledge graph completion. arXiv preprint arXiv:1901.09590, 2019.
  5. Recent developments in clinical terminologies - snomed ct, loinc, and rxnorm. Yearbook of medical informatics, 27:129–139, Aug 2018. ISSN 2364-0502.
  6. Freebase: a collaboratively created graph database for structuring human knowledge. In SIGMOD Conference, pages 1247–1250. ACM, 2008.
  7. Translating embeddings for modeling multi-relational data. In NIPS, pages 2787–2795, 2013.
  8. Fuzzy logic based logical query answering on knowledge graphs. In AAAI, pages 3939–3948. AAAI Press, 2022.
  9. Self-supervised hyperboloid representations from logical queries over knowledge graphs. In Proceedings of the Web Conference 2021, pages 1373–1384, 2021.
  10. Go for a walk and arrive at the answer: Reasoning over paths in knowledge bases using reinforcement learning. arXiv preprint arXiv:1711.05851, 2017.
  11. Introduction to Lattices and Order, Second Edition. Cambridge University Press, 2002.
  12. D. Daza and M. Cochez. Message passing query embedding. In ICML Workshop - Graph Representation Learning and Beyond, 2020. URL https://arxiv.org/abs/2002.02406.
  13. Convolutional 2d knowledge graph embeddings. In AAAI, pages 1811–1818. AAAI Press, 2018.
  14. An empirical investigation of catastrophic forgetting in gradient-based neural networks. arXiv preprint arXiv:1312.6211, 2013.
  15. Embedding logical queries on knowledge graphs. In NeurIPS, pages 2030–2041, 2018.
  16. Reasoning on knowledge graphs with debate dynamics. In AAAI, pages 4123–4131. AAAI Press, 2020.
  17. Systematic integration of biomedical knowledge prioritizes drugs for repurposing. bioRxiv, 2017. doi: 10.1101/087619. URL https://www.biorxiv.org/content/early/2017/08/31/087619.
  18. Parameter-efficient transfer learning for nlp. In International Conference on Machine Learning, pages 2790–2799. PMLR, 2019.
  19. Triangular Norms, volume 8 of Trends in Logic. Springer, 2000.
  20. Triangular norms. position paper I: basic analytical and algebraic properties. Fuzzy Sets Syst., 143(1):5–26, 2004.
  21. R. Kruse and C. Moewes. Fuzzy systems. BG Teubner Stuttgart, 1993.
  22. Canonical tensor decomposition for knowledge base completion. In ICML, volume 80 of Proceedings of Machine Learning Research, pages 2869–2878. PMLR, 2018.
  23. C. E. Lipscomb. Medical subject headings (mesh). Bull Med Libr Assoc., 2000. URL http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi?artid=35238. 88(3): 265–266.
  24. G. A. Miller. WORDNET: a lexical database for english. In HLT. Morgan Kaufmann, 1992.
  25. Complex query answering with neural link predictors (extended abstract). In IJCAI, pages 5309–5313. ijcai.org, 2022.
  26. A review of relational machine learning for knowledge graphs. Proceedings of the IEEE, 104(1):11–33, 2016.
  27. Industry-scale knowledge graphs: lessons and challenges. Commun. ACM, 62(8):36–43, 2019.
  28. J. Platt et al. Probabilistic outputs for support vector machines and comparisons to regularized likelihood methods. Advances in large margin classifiers, 10(3):61–74, 1999.
  29. H. Ren and J. Leskovec. Beta embeddings for multi-hop logical reasoning in knowledge graphs. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, 33:19716–19726, 2020.
  30. Query2box: Reasoning over knowledge graphs in vector space using box embeddings. In 8th International Conference on Learning Representations, ICLR 2020, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, April 26-30, 2020. OpenReview.net, 2020. URL https://openreview.net/forum?id=BJgr4kSFDS.
  31. Neural graph reasoning: Complex logical query answering meets graph databases. CoRR, abs/2303.14617, 2023.
  32. You CAN teach an old dog new tricks! on training knowledge graph embeddings. In ICLR. OpenReview.net, 2020.
  33. Drum: End-to-end differentiable rule mining on knowledge graphs. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, 32, 2019.
  34. Modeling relational data with graph convolutional networks. In European semantic web conference, pages 593–607. Springer, 2018.
  35. Yago: a core of semantic knowledge. In WWW, pages 697–706. ACM, 2007.
  36. Rotate: Knowledge graph embedding by relational rotation in complex space. arXiv preprint arXiv:1902.10197, 2019.
  37. P. Tabacof and L. Costabello. Probability calibration for knowledge graph embedding models. In 8th International Conference on Learning Representations, ICLR 2020, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, April 26-30, 2020. OpenReview.net, 2020. URL https://openreview.net/forum?id=S1g8K1BFwS.
  38. Inductive relation prediction by subgraph reasoning. In International Conference on Machine Learning, pages 9448–9457. PMLR, 2020.
  39. K. Toutanova and D. Chen. Observed versus latent features for knowledge base and text inference. In Proceedings of the 3rd Workshop on Continuous Vector Space Models and their Compositionality, pages 57–66, Beijing, China, July 2015. Association for Computational Linguistics. doi: 10.18653/v1/W15-4007. URL https://www.aclweb.org/anthology/W15-4007.
  40. Complex embeddings for simple link prediction. In ICML, volume 48 of JMLR Workshop and Conference Proceedings, pages 2071–2080. JMLR.org, 2016.
  41. Composition-based multi-relational graph convolutional networks. arXiv preprint arXiv:1911.03082, 2019.
  42. D. Vrandečić and M. Krötzsch. Wikidata: A free collaborative knowledge base. Communications of the ACM, 57:78–85, 2014. URL http://cacm.acm.org/magazines/2014/10/178785-wikidata/fulltext.
  43. Deeppath: A reinforcement learning method for knowledge graph reasoning. In EMNLP, pages 564–573. Association for Computational Linguistics, 2017.
  44. Embedding entities and relations for learning and inference in knowledge bases. arXiv preprint arXiv:1412.6575, 2014.
  45. Differentiable learning of logical rules for knowledge base reasoning. Advances in neural information processing systems, 30, 2017.
  46. Cone: Cone embeddings for multi-hop reasoning over knowledge graphs. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, 34:19172–19183, 2021.
  47. Neural bellman-ford networks: A general graph neural network framework for link prediction. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, 34:29476–29490, 2021.
  48. Neural-symbolic models for logical queries on knowledge graphs. arXiv preprint arXiv:2205.10128, 2022.
Citations (10)

Summary

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