Fact retrieval from knowledge graphs through semantic and contextual attention
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Knowledge Graphs (KGs), such as DBpedia and ConceptNet, enhance Natural Language Processing (NLP) applications by providing structured information. However, extracting accurate data from KGs is challenging due to issues in entity detection, disambiguation, and relation classification, which often lead to errors and inefficiencies. We introduce Attention2Query (A2Q) , an attention-driven approach that directly ranks and selects the most relevant facts, thus minimizing error propagation. A2Q centres on three key contributions: (1) Focused Node Selection , which streamlines graph traversal; (2) Global Attention Alignment , improving retrieval by comparing facts against the query text; and (3) Contextual Re-ranking , enabling on-the-fly adjustments of fact importance based on evolving query context. Experimental results across multiple tasks and datasets show that A2Q substantially outperforms baseline methods, including those in zero-shot settings, achieving higher retrieval accuracy with reduced computational overhead. • Novel on-the-go fact retrieval framework for KGs using attention mechanisms. • The reranking strategy improves retrieval accuracy with minimal context. • A versatile approach reduces retrieval of non-relevant data from KGs. • A2Q outperforms baselines in data quality and efficiency in zero-shot 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 | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.007 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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".