Learning Representations of Bi-level Knowledge Graphs for Reasoning beyond Link Prediction
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Knowledge graphs represent known facts using triplets. While existing knowledge graph embedding methods only consider the connections between entities, we propose considering the relationships between triplets. For example, let us consider two triplets T1 and T2 where T1 is (Academy_Awards, Nominates, Avatar) and T2 is (Avatar, Wins, Academy_Awards). Given these two base-level triplets, we see that T1 is a prerequisite for T2. In this paper, we define a higher-level triplet to represent a relationship between triplets, e.g., where PrerequisiteFor is a higher-level relation. We define a bi-level knowledge graph that consists of the base-level and the higher-level triplets. We also propose a data augmentation strategy based on the random walks on the bi-level knowledge graph to augment plausible triplets. Our model called BiVE learns embeddings by taking into account the structures of the base-level and the higher-level triplets, with additional consideration of the augmented triplets. We propose two new tasks: triplet prediction and conditional link prediction. Given a triplet T1 and a higher-level relation, the triplet prediction predicts a triplet that is likely to be connected to T1 by the higher-level relation, e.g., . The conditional link prediction predicts a missing entity in a triplet conditioned on another triplet, e.g., . Experimental results show that BiVE significantly outperforms all other methods in the two new tasks and the typical base-level link prediction in real-world bi-level knowledge graphs.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it