Anchoring Path for Inductive Relation Prediction in Knowledge Graphs
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Aiming to accurately predict missing edges representing relations between entities, which are pervasive in real-world Knowledge Graphs (KGs), relation prediction plays a critical role in enhancing the comprehensiveness and utility of KGs. Recent research focuses on path-based methods due to their inductive and explainable properties. However, these methods face a great challenge when lots of reasoning paths do not form Closed Paths (CPs) in the KG. To address this challenge, we propose Anchoring Path Sentence Transformer (APST) by introducing Anchoring Paths (APs) to alleviate the reliance of CPs. Specifically, we develop a search-based description retrieval method to enrich entity descriptions and an assessment mechanism to evaluate the rationality of APs. APST takes both APs and CPs as the inputs of a unified Sentence Transformer architecture, enabling comprehensive predictions and high-quality explanations. We evaluate APST on three public datasets and achieve state-of-the-art (SOTA) performance in 30 of 36 transductive, inductive, and few-shot experimental settings.
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 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.002 |
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".