HRGraph: Leveraging LLMs for HR Data Knowledge Graphs with Information Propagation-based Job Recommendation
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 (KGs) serving as semantic networks, prove highly effective in managing complex interconnected data in different domains, by offering a unified, contextualized, and structured representation with flexibility that allows for easy adaptation to evolving knowledge.Processing complex Human Resources (HR) data, KGs can help in different HR functions like recruitment, job matching, identifying learning gaps, and enhancing employee retention.Despite their potential, limited efforts have been made to implement practical HR knowledge graphs.This study addresses this gap by presenting a framework for effectively developing HR knowledge graphs from documents using Large Language Models.The resulting KG can be used for a variety of downstream tasks, including job matching, identifying employee skill gaps, and many more.In this work, we showcase instances where HR KGs prove instrumental in precise job matching, yielding advantages for both employers and employees.Empirical evidence from experiments with information propagation in KGs and Graph Neural Nets, along with case studies underscores the effectiveness of KGs in tasks such as job and employee recommendations and job area classification.Code and
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 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