Does Pre-trained Language Model Actually Infer Unseen Links in Knowledge Graph Completion?
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Knowledge graphs (KGs) consist of links that describe relationships between entities. Due to the difficulty of manually enumerating all relationships between entities, automatically completing them is essential for KGs. Knowledge Graph Completion (KGC) is a task that infers unseen relationships between entities in a KG. Traditional embedding-based KGC methods, such as RESCAL, TransE, DistMult, ComplEx, RotatE, HAKE, HousE, etc., infer missing links using only the knowledge from training data. In contrast, the recent Pre-trained Language Model (PLM)-based KGC utilizes knowledge obtained during pre-training. Therefore, PLM-based KGC can estimate missing links between entities by reusing memorized knowledge from pre-training without inference. This approach is problematic because building KGC models aims to infer unseen links between entities. However, conventional evaluations in KGC do not consider inference and memorization abilities separately. Thus, a PLM-based KGC method, which achieves high performance in current KGC evaluations, may be ineffective in practical applications. To address this issue, we analyze whether PLM-based KGC methods make inferences or merely access memorized knowledge. For this purpose, we propose a method for constructing synthetic datasets specified in this analysis and conclude that PLMs acquire the inference abilities required for KGC through pre-training, even though the performance improvements mostly come from textual information of entities and relations.
Key facts. Cited by 1 paper in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 40 of its 79 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 15 Nov 2023.
Builds on
40 of 79 references.
References · 40
- 2018BERT: Pre-training of Deep Bidirectional Transformers for Language Understandingcited by 40,399
- 2020Language Models are Few-Shot Learnerscited by 32,419
- 2019Exploring the Limits of Transfer Learning with a Unified Text-to-Text Transformercited by 14,599
- 2019RoBERTa: A Robustly Optimized BERT Pretraining Approachcited by 13,372
- 2023Llama 2: Open Foundation and Fine-Tuned Chat Modelscited by 13,028
- 2023Judging LLM-as-a-Judge with MT-Bench and Chatbot Arenacited by 8,626
- 2019BART: Denoising Sequence-to-Sequence Pre-training for Natural Language Generation, Translation, and Comprehensioncited by 5,893
- 2019Language Models as Knowledge Bases?cited by 1,936
- 2014Embedding Entities and Relations for Learning and Inference in Knowledge Basescited by 932
- 2016Complex Embeddings for Simple Link Predictioncited by 902
- 2019RotatE: Knowledge Graph Embedding by Relational Rotation in Complex Spacecited by 898
- 2017Convolutional 2D Knowledge Graph Embeddingscited by 730
28 more
- 2020How Much Knowledge Can You Pack Into the Parameters of a Language Model?cited by 719
- 2023Unifying Large Language Models and Knowledge Graphs: A Roadmapcited by 668
- 2023Is ChatGPT a General-Purpose Natural Language Processing Task Solver?cited by 488
- 2023Toxicity in ChatGPT: Analyzing Persona-assigned Language Modelscited by 360
- 2019KEPLER: A Unified Model for Knowledge Embedding and Pre-trained Language Representationcited by 356
- 2023NLP Evaluation in trouble: On the Need to Measure LLM Data Contamination for each Benchmarkcited by 348
- 2019KG-BERT: BERT for Knowledge Graph Completioncited by 324
- 2019K-BERT: Enabling Language Representation with Knowledge Graphcited by 304
- 2023From Pretraining Data to Language Models to Downstream Tasks: Tracking the Trails of Political Biases Leading to Unfair NLP Modelscited by 260
- 2022Data Contamination: From Memorization to Exploitationcited by 236
- 2021Adversarial GLUE: A Multi-Task Benchmark for Robustness Evaluation of Language Modelscited by 232
- 2023On the Robustness of ChatGPT: An Adversarial and Out-of-distribution Perspectivecited by 211
- 2023Sources of Hallucination by Large Language Models on Inference Taskscited by 169
- 2022On the Origin of Hallucinations in Conversational Models: Is it the Datasets or the Models?cited by 138
- 2019Learning Hierarchy-Aware Knowledge Graph Embeddings for Link Predictioncited by 133
- 2019Learning Attention-based Embeddings for Relation Prediction in Knowledge Graphscited by 125
- 2022FaithDial: A Faithful Benchmark for Information-Seeking Dialoguecited by 109
- 2020Language Models as Knowledge Bases: On Entity Representations, Storage Capacity, and Paraphrased Queriescited by 107
- 2020PyKEEN 1.0: A Python Library for Training and Evaluating Knowledge Graph Embeddingscited by 77
- 2022Multi-Modal Knowledge Graph Construction and Application: A Surveycited by 74
- 2022Leakage and the Reproducibility Crisis in ML-based Sciencecited by 65
- 2022Gender Bias in Masked Language Models for Multiple Languagescited by 60
- 2022Debiasing isn't enough! -- On the Effectiveness of Debiasing MLMs and their Social Biases in Downstream Taskscited by 48
- 2022From Discrimination to Generation: Knowledge Graph Completion with Generative Transformercited by 45
- 2020RICA: Evaluating Robust Inference Capabilities Based on Commonsense Axiomscited by 28
- 2020Deep Learning on Knowledge Graph for Recommender System: A Surveycited by 19
- 2021Unified Interpretation of Softmax Cross-Entropy and Negative Sampling: With Case Study for Knowledge Graph Embeddingcited by 7
- 2022Subsampling for Knowledge Graph Embedding Explainedcited by 2
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2024: 1.
1 paper.