IPPT4KRL: Iterative Post-Processing Transfer for Knowledge Representation Learning
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Knowledge Graphs (KGs), a structural way to model human knowledge, have been a critical component of many artificial intelligence applications. Many KG-based tasks are built using knowledge representation learning, which embeds KG entities and relations into a low-dimensional semantic space. However, the quality of representation learning is often limited by the heterogeneity and sparsity of real-world KGs. Multi-KG representation learning, which utilizes KGs from different sources collaboratively, presents one promising solution. In this paper, we propose a simple, but effective iterative method that post-processes pre-trained knowledge graph embedding (IPPT4KRL) on individual KGs to maximize the knowledge transfer from another KG when a small portion of alignment information is introduced. Specifically, additional triples are iteratively included in the post-processing based on their adjacencies to the cross-KG alignments to refine the pre-trained embedding space of individual KGs. We also provide the benchmarking results of existing multi-KG representation learning methods on several generated and well-known datasets. The empirical results of the link prediction task on these datasets show that the proposed IPPT4KRL method achieved comparable and even superior results when compared against more complex methods in multi-KG representation learning.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.005 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".