MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4385286458 · doi:10.1109/icde55515.2023.00225

Towards a GML-Enabled Knowledge Graph Platform

2023· article· en· W4385286458 on OpenAlexaff
Hussein Abdallah, Essam Mansour

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAdvanced Graph Neural Networks
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceKnowledge graphGraphInformation retrievalTheoretical computer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This vision paper proposes KGNet, an on-demand graph machine learning (GML) as a service on top of RDF engines to support GML-enabled SPARQL queries. KGNet automates the training of GML models on a KG by identifying a task-specific subgraph. This helps reduce the task-irrelevant KG structure and properties for better scalability and accuracy. While training a GML model on KG, KGNet collects metadata of trained models in the form of an RDF graph called KGMeta, which is interlinked with the relevant subgraphs in KG. Finally, all trained models are accessible via a SPARQL-like query. We call it a GML-enabled query and refer to it as SPARQLML. KGNet supports SPARQLMLon top of existing RDF engines as an interface for querying and inferencing over KGs using GML models. The development of KGNet poses research opportunities in several areas, including meta-sampling for identifying task-specific subgraphs, GML pipeline automation with computational constraints, such as limited time and memory budget, and SPARQLMLquery optimization. KGNet supports different GML tasks, such as node classification, link prediction, and semantic entity matching. We evaluated KGNet using two real KGs of different application domains. Compared to training on the entire KG, KGNet significantly reduced training time and memory usage while maintaining comparable or improved accuracy. The KGNet source-code1is available for further study.

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)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.014
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.035

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.014
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0060.015
Open science0.0060.010
Research integrity0.0020.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.005

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.

Opus teacher head0.032
GPT teacher head0.282
Teacher spread0.250 · 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
GenreMethods

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

Citations3
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAdvanced Graph Neural NetworksFrench-language works237,207