MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3176251287 · doi:10.1109/jiot.2021.3092360

Tensor Graph Attention Network for Knowledge Reasoning in Internet of Things

2021· article· en· W3176251287 on OpenAlexaff
Jing Yang, Laurence T. Yang, Hao Wang, Yuan Gao, Huazhong Liu, Xia Xie

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Internet of Things Journal · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicTensor decomposition and applications
Canadian institutionsSt. Francis Xavier University
FundersNational Key Research and Development Program of ChinaNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsComputer scienceTheoretical computer sciencePremiseGraphKnowledge representation and reasoningArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Knowledge graph builds the bridge from massive data generated by the interaction and communication between various objects to intelligent applications and services in Internet of Things. The graph representation learning technology represented by graph neural networks plays an essential role in the understanding and reasoning of the knowledge graph with complicated internal structure. Although they are capable of assigning different attention weights to neighbors, the graph attention network (GAT) and its variants are inherently flawed and inadequate in modeling high-order knowledge graphs with high heterogeneity. Therefore, we propose a novel multirelational GAT framework in this article for knowledge reasoning over heterogeneous graphs by employing tensor and tensor operations. Specifically, we formulate the general high-order heterogeneous knowledge graph first. Then, the tensor GAT (TGAT), composed of three components: 1) heterogeneous information propagation; 2) multimodal semantic-aware attention; and 3) knowledge aggregation, is developed to simulate rich interactions between mixed triples, entities, and relationships when aggregating local information. What is more, we utilize the Tucker model to compress the parameters of TGAT and further reduce the storage and calculation consumption of the intermediate calculation process on the premise of maintaining the expressive power. We conduct extensive experiments to solve the link prediction task on four real-world heterogeneous graphs, and the results demonstrate that the TGAT model proposed in this article remarkably outperforms state-of-the-art competitors and improves the hits@1 accuracy by up to 7.6%.

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.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.027
Threshold uncertainty score0.054

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.003
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.039
GPT teacher head0.325
Teacher spread0.286 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations20
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Internet of Things JournalSame topicTensor decomposition and applicationsFrench-language works237,207