MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Out-of-Sample Representation Learning for Knowledge Graphs

2020· article· en· W3101708158 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAdvanced Graph Neural Networks
Canadian institutionsCollège Boréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceRepresentation (politics)Benchmark (surveying)Artificial intelligenceMachine learningFeature learningKnowledge graphSample (material)GraphTask (project management)Theoretical computer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Many important problems can be formulated as reasoning in knowledge graphs. Representation learning has proved extremely effective for transductive reasoning, in which one needs to make new predictions for already observed entities. This is true for both attributed graphs (where each entity has an initial feature vector) and non-attributed graphs (where the only initial information derives from known relations with other entities). For out-of-sample reasoning, where one needs to make predictions for entities that were unseen at training time, much prior work considers attributed graph. However, this problem is surprisingly under-explored for non-attributed graphs. In this paper, we study the out-of-sample representation learning problem for non-attributed knowledge graphs, create benchmark datasets for this task, develop several models and baselines, and provide empirical analyses and comparisons of the proposed models and baselines.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.888
Threshold uncertainty score0.255

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.074
GPT teacher head0.326
Teacher spread0.252 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Quick stats

Citations19
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAdvanced Graph Neural NetworksFrench-language works237,207