Skip to main content

Cluster Robust Inference for Embedding-Based Knowledge Graph Completion

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
Knowledge Science, Engineering and Management (KSEM 2023)

Abstract

Knowledge Graphs (KGs) are able to structure and represent knowledge in complex systems, whereby their completeness impacts the quality of any further application. Real world KGs are notoriously incomplete, which is why KG Completion (KGC) methods emerged. Most KGC methods rely on Knowledge Graph Embedding (KGE) based link prediction models, which provide completion candidates for a sparse KG. Metrics like the Mean Rank, the Mean Reciprocal Rank or Hits@K evaluate the quality of those models, like TransR, DistMult or ComplEx. Based on the principle of supervised learning, these metrics evaluate a KGC model trained on a training dataset, based on the partition of true completion candidates it achieves on a test dataset. Dealing with real world, complex KGs, we found that sparsity is not equally distributed across a KG, but rather grouped in clusters. We use modularity-based KG clustering, to approximate sparsity levels in a KG. Furthermore, we postulate that prediction errors of an embedding-based KGC model are correlated within clusters of a KG but uncorrelated between them and formalize a new, cluster-robust KGC evaluation metric. We test our metric using six benchmark dataset and one real-world industrial example dataset. Our experiments show its superiority to existing metrics with regards to the prediction of cluster-robust triplets\(^{1}\)(\(^{1}\)The code is available at https://github.com/simoncharmms/crmrr.).

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 59.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 79.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    In general, those graphs are referred to as Label-Property-Graphs and are opposed to graphs where also a pre-defined scheme for rules over entities, referred to as an ontology, is underlying [25]. In this paper, we focus on Label-Property-Graphs.

References

  1. Akrami, F., Saeef, M.S., Zhang, Q., Hu, W., Li, C.: Realistic re-evaluation of knowledge graph completion methods: an experimental study (2020). https://doi.org/10.1145/3318464.3380599

  2. Ali, M., et al.: Bringing light into the dark: a large-scale evaluation of knowledge graph embedding models under a unified framework. CoRR (2020). https://doi.org/10.1109/TPAMI.2021.3124805

  3. Bishop, C.M.: Pattern Recognition and Machine Learning. Springer, New York (2007). https://doi.org/10.1117/1.2819119

  4. Biswas, R.: Embedding based link prediction for knowledge graph completion. In: Proceedings of the 29th ACM International Conference on Information and Knowledge Management, pp. 3221–3224. ACM, Virtual Event, Ireland (2020). https://doi.org/10.1145/3340531.3418512

  5. Bordes, A., Usunier, N., Garcia-Durán, A., Weston, J., Yakhnenko, O.: Translating embeddings for modeling multi-relational data. In: Proceedings of the 26th International Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems, vol. 2, pp. 2787–2795. Curran Associates Inc., Red Hook, NY, USA (2013). https://doi.org/10.5555/2999792.2999923

  6. Chen, Z., Wang, Y., Zhao, B., Cheng, J., Zhao, X., Duan, Z.: Knowledge graph completion: a review. IEEE Access 8, 192435–192456 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2020.3030076

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Colin Cameron, A., Miller, D.L.: A practitioner’s guide to cluster-robust inference. J. Hum. Resourc. 50(2), 317–372 (2015). https://doi.org/10.3368/jhr.50.2.317

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Esarey, J., Menger, A.: Practical and effective approaches to dealing with clustered data. Polit. Sci. Res. Methods 7(3), 541–559 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1017/psrm.2017.42

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Fagiolo, G.: Clustering in complex directed networks. Phys. Rev. E 76, 026107 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevE.76.026107

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Fayyad, U., Smyth, P., Piatetsky-Shapiro, G.: From data mining to knowledge discovery in databases. AI Mag. 17(3), 37–54 (1996). https://doi.org/10.1609/aimag.v17i3.1230

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Fuhr, N.: Some common mistakes in IR evaluation, and how they can be avoided. ACM SIGIR Forum 51(3), 32–41 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1145/3190580.3190586

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Hoyt, C.T., Berrendorf, M., Galkin, M., Tresp, V., Gyori, B.M.: A unified framework for rank-based evaluation metrics for link prediction in knowledge graphs. Pre-print (2022). https://doi.org/10.48550/ARXIV.2203.07544

  13. Kumar, S., Hooi, B., Makhija, D., Kumar, M., Faloutsos, C., Subrahmanian, V.: Rev2: fraudulent user prediction in rating platforms. In: Proceedings of the Eleventh ACM International Conference on Web Search and Data Mining, pp. 333–341. ACM (2018). https://doi.org/10.1145/3159652.3159729

  14. Kumar, S., Spezzano, F., Subrahmanian, V., Faloutsos, C.: Edge weight prediction in weighted signed networks. In: 2016 IEEE 16th International Conference on Data Mining (ICDM), pp. 221–230. IEEE (2016). https://doi.org/10.1109/ICDM.2016.0033

  15. Lee, J.R., Gharan, S.O., Trevisan, L.: Multiway spectral partitioning and higher-order Cheeger inequalities. J. ACM 61(6), 1–30 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1145/2665063

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  16. Leskovec, J., Lang, K.J., Dasgupta, A., Mahoney, M.W.: Community structure in large networks: natural cluster sizes and the absence of large well-defined clusters (2008). https://doi.org/10.1080/15427951.2009.10129177

  17. Leung, M.P.: Network cluster-robust inference. Pre-print (2021). https://doi.org/10.48550/ARXIV.2103.01470

  18. Lin, Y., Liu, Z., Sun, M., Liu, Y., Zhu, X.: Learning entity and relation embeddings for knowledge graph completion. In: Proceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence, vol. 29, no. 1 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1609/aaai.v29i1.9491

  19. MacKinnon, J.G.: How cluster-robust inference is changing applied econometrics. Can. J. Econ./Revue canadienne d’économique 52(3), 851–881 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1111/caje.12388

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. MacKinnon, J.G., Nielsen, M.Ø., Webb, M.D.: Cluster-robust inference: a guide to empirical practice. J. Econometrics, S0304407622000781 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeconom.2022.04.001

  21. Marina Speranskaya, M.S.: Ranking vs. classifying: measuring knowledge base completion quality. Pre-print (2020). https://doi.org/10.24432/C57G65

  22. McAuley, J., Leskovec, J.: Hidden factors and hidden topics: understanding rating dimensions with review text. In: Proceedings of the 7th ACM Conference on Recommender Systems. RecSys ’13, pp. 165–172. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA (2013). https://doi.org/10.1145/2507157.2507163

  23. Mirkin, B.G.: Clustering for Data Mining: A Data Recovery Approach. No. 3 in Computer Science and Data Analysis Series, Chapman & Hall/CRC, Boca Raton, FL (2005). https://doi.org/10.1201/9781420034912

  24. Paranjape, A., Benson, A.R., Leskovec, J.: Motifs in temporal networks. In: Proceedings of the Tenth ACM International Conference on Web Search and Data Mining. ACM (2017). https://doi.org/10.1145/3018661.3018731

  25. Paulheim, H.: Knowledge graph refinement: a survey of approaches and evaluation methods. Semant. Web 8(3), 489–508 (2016). https://doi.org/10.3233/SW-160218

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Rosa, G.J.M.: The Elements of Statistical Learning: Data Mining, Inference, and Prediction by Hastie, T., Tibshirani, R., Friedman, J. Biometrics 66(4), 1315–1315 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1541-0420.2010.01516.x

  27. Rozemberczki, B., Allen, C., Sarkar, R.: Multi-scale attributed node embedding (2019). https://doi.org/10.1093/comnet/cnab014

  28. Traag, V.A., Waltman, L., van Eck, N.J.: From Louvain to Leiden: guaranteeing well-connected communities. Sci. Rep. 9(1), 5233 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-019-41695-z

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Trouillon, T., Welbl, J., Riedel, S., Gaussier, É., Bouchard, G.: Complex embeddings for simple link prediction. Pre-print (2016). https://doi.org/10.48550/ARXIV.1606.06357

  30. van Engelen, J.E., Hoos, H.H.: A survey on semi-supervised learning. Mach. Learn. 109(2), 373–440 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10994-019-05855-6

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  31. White, H.: A heteroskedasticity-consistent covariance matrix estimator and a direct test for heteroskedasticity. Econometrica 48(4), 817 (1980). https://doi.org/10.2307/1912934

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  32. Yang, B., Yih, W.T., He, X., Gao, J., Deng, L.: Embedding entities and relations for learning and inference in knowledge bases. Pre-print (2014). https://doi.org/10.48550/ARXIV.1412.6575

  33. Yang, H., Lin, Z., Zhang, M.: Rethinking knowledge graph evaluation under the open-world assumption (2022). https://doi.org/10.48550/ARXIV.2209.08858

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Simon Schramm .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Appendix

Appendix

1.1 Appendix A: Relevant Notations of this Paper

Notation

Meaning

G

A graph

\( \lbrace (h, r, t) \rbrace \in \mathcal {T}\)

A set of triples with heads, relations and tails

\(e \in \mathcal {E}\)

A set of entities e

\(r \in \mathcal {R}\)

A set of relations r

\(R_r \in \mathbb {R}^{d \times d}\)

A \(d \times d\) dimensional matrix with coefficients \(a_{ji}\)

\(r_r \in \mathbb {R}^{d}\)

A d-dimensional vector

\(k^{out}=\sum _j a_{ji}\)

The outbound degree

\(k_i^{in}=\sum _j a_{ij}\)

The inbound degree

Deg

The total degree of a graph

T(e)

The number of triangles through entity e

Trans

The transitivity of a graph

CCO

The mean clustering coefficient of a graph

\(r_{cc}\)

The rank of a cross-cluster completion candidate

n

The total count of ranks \(r_{i}\)

m

The count of cross-cluster ranks \(r_{j \vert cc}\) from \( \lbrace (h,r,t)_{cc} \rbrace \)

\(|c |\)

The count of clusters of a clustered KG

\((h,r,t)_{cc}\)

A cross-cluster completion candidate

1.2 Appendix B: Metrics of Used Knowledge Graphs

 

Industry KG

\(BTC_{alpha}\)

\(BTC_{otc}\)

\(web-google\)

[14]

[13]

[16]

Node count

116699

24185

35591

5105039

Relation count

5710

3782

5881

875713

Deg

40.875

12.789

12.103

11.659

Trans

0.012

0.063

0.045

0.449

CCO

0.044

0.158

0.151

0.369

\(|c |\)

61

79

87

29722

 

\(sx-stackoverflow\)

\(web-amazon\)

\(web-facebook\)

 

[24]

[22]

[27]

Node count

574795

925872

171002

 

Relation count

406972

334863

22470

 

Deg

2.824

5.529

15.220

 

Trans

0.001

0.103

0.124

 

CCO

0.001

0.198

0.179

 

\(|c |\)

90266

31916

790

 

1.3 Appendix C: Training Details and Results by KG and Model.

 

Model

Epochs

Batch size

m/n

MR

MRR

\(H_{10}\)

CRMRR

\(web-google\)

TransR

  

0.381

6.070

0.142

0.887

0.221

DistMult

510

32

0.137

49.370

0.024

0.362

0.389

ComplEx

  

0.152

315.440

0.001

0.135

0.229

\(web-amazon\)

TransR

  

0.212

11.300

0.093

0.362

0.116

DistMult

510

32

0.365

29.620

0.012

0.566

0.217

ComplEx

  

0.195

508.480

0.009

0.112

0.368

\(sx-stackoverflow\)

TransR

  

0.262

7.150

0.074

0.791

0.145

DistMult

510

32

0.165

38.400

0.025

0.498

0.285

ComplEx

  

0.265

484.940

0.002

0.255

0.115

\(web-facebook\)

TransR

  

0.185

3.660

0.156

0.272

0.083

DistMult

510

32

0.114

26.880

0.008

0.798

0.127

ComplEx

  

0.098

795.670

0.001

0.302

0.136

Industry KG

TransR

  

0.134

8.312

0.124

0.727

0.189

DistMult

510

32

0.119

54.854

0.018

0.578

0.283

ComplEx

  

0.219

470.813

0.002

0.184

0.171

\(BTC_{alpha}\)

TransR

  

0.530

7.400

0.056

0.210

0.082

DistMult

510

32

0.262

20.840

0.011

0.438

0.180

ComplEx

  

0.235

404.900

0.004

0.076

0.119

\(BTC_{otc}\)

TransR

  

0.154

3.820

0.113

0.626

0.155

DistMult

510

32

0.170

21.390

0.012

0.394

0.202

ComplEx

  

0.32

348.40

0.001

0.134

0.081

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2023 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this paper

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this paper

Schramm, S., Niklas, U., Schmid, U. (2023). Cluster Robust Inference for Embedding-Based Knowledge Graph Completion. In: Jin, Z., Jiang, Y., Buchmann, R.A., Bi, Y., Ghiran, AM., Ma, W. (eds) Knowledge Science, Engineering and Management. KSEM 2023. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 14117. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-40283-8_25

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-40283-8_25

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-031-40282-1

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-031-40283-8

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics