skip to main content
10.1145/3502223.3502224acmotherconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesijckgConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

Multi-hop Knowledge Graph Reasoning Based on Hyperbolic Knowledge Graph Embedding and Reinforcement Learning

Authors Info & Claims
Published:24 January 2022Publication History

ABSTRACT

Some unseen facts in knowledge graphs (KGs) can be complemented by multi-hop knowledge graph reasoning. The process of multi-hop reasoning can be presented as a serialized decision problem, and then be solved with reinforcement learning (RL). However, existing RL-based reasoning methods cannot deal with the hierarchical information in KGs effectively. To solve this issue, we propose a novel RL-based multi-hop KG reasoning model Path Additional Action-space Ranking (PAAR). Our model first proposes a hyperbolic knowledge graph embedding (KGE) model which can effectively capture hierarchical information in KGs. To introduce hierarchical information into RL, the hyperbolic KGE vector is subsequently added to the state space and helps to expand the action space. In order to alleviate the reward sparsity problem in RL, our model utilizes the score function of hyperbolic KGE model as a soft reward. Finally, the metric of hyperbolic space is added to the training of RL as a penalty strategy to constrain the sufficiency of multi-hop reasoning paths. Experimental results on two real-world datasets show that our proposed model not only provides effective answers but also offers sufficient paths.

References

  1. M A Abramowicz, I Bengtsson, V Karas, 2002. Poincaré Ball Embeddings of the Optical Geometry. Classical and Quantum Gravity(2002), 3963.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  2. Sören Auer, Christian Bizer, Georgi Kobilarov, 2007. DBpedia: a Nucleus for a Web of Open Data. In Proceedings of the 6th International Semantic Web Conference, Vol. 4825. 722–735.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  3. Ivana Balažević, Carl Allen, and Timothy Hospedales. 2019. Multi-relational poincaré graph embeddings. In Proceedings of the 33rd International Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems. 4463–4473.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  4. Kurt D. Bollacker, Colin Evans, Praveen K. Paritosh, 2008. Freebase: a collaboratively created graph database for structuring human knowledge. In Proceedings of the 26th ACM International Conference on Management of Data. 1247–1250.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  5. Silvere Bonnabel. 2013. Stochastic Gradient Descent on Riemannian Manifolds. IEEE Trans. Automat. Control(2013), 2217–2229.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  6. Antoine Bordes, Nicolas Usunier, Alberto García-Durán, 2013. Translating embeddings for modeling multi-relational data. In Proceedings of the 26th International Conference in Neural Information Processing Systems. 2787–2795.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  7. James W Cannon, William J Floyd, Richard Kenyon, 1997. Hyperbolic Geometry. Flavors of geometry 31(1997), 59–115.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  8. Ines Chami, Zhitao Ying, Christopher Ré, 2019. Hyperbolic Graph Convolutional Neural Networks. In Proceedings of the 33rd Neural Information Processing Systems. 4869–4880.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  9. Rajarshi Das, Shehzaad Dhuliawala, Manzil Zaheer, 2018. Go for a Walk and Arrive at the Answer: Reasoning Over Paths in Knowledge Bases using Reinforcement Learning. In Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on Learning Representations.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  10. Rajarshi Das, Arvind Neelakantan, David Belanger, 2017. Chains of reasoning over entities, relations, and text using recurrent neural networks. In Proceedings of the 15th Conference of the European Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics. 132–141.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  11. Hao Fei, Yafeng Ren, Yue Zhang, 2021. Enriching contextualized language model from knowledge graph for biomedical information extraction. Briefings in Bioinformatics(2021), bbaa110.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  12. Cong Fu, Tong Chen, Meng Qu, 2019. Collaborative Policy Learning for Open Knowledge Graph Reasoning. In Proceedings of the 2019 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing. 2672–2681.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  13. Ni Lao, Einat Minkov, and William W. Cohen. 2015. Learning relational features with backward random walks. In Proceedings of the 53rd Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics and the 7th International Joint Conference on Natural Language Processing. 666–675.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  14. Ni Lao, Tom M. Mitchell, and William W. Cohen. 2011. Random walk inference and learning in a large scale knowledge base. In Proceedings of the 16th Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing. 529–539.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  15. Xi Victoria Lin, Richard Socher, and Caiming Xiong. 2018. Multi-Hop Knowledge Graph Reasoning with Reward Shaping. In Proceedings of the 23rd Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing. 3243–3253.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  16. Federico López, Benjamin Heinzerling, and Michael Strube. 2019. Fine-Grained Entity Typing in Hyperbolic Space. In Proceedings of the 4th Workshop on Representation Learning for NLP. 169–180.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  17. Xin Lv, Xu Han, Lei Hou, 2020. Dynamic Anticipation and Completion for Multi-Hop Reasoning over Sparse Knowledge Graph. In Proceedings of the 25th Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing. 5694–5703.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  18. Farzaneh Mahdisoltani, Joanna Biega, and Fabian M. Suchanek. 2014. Yago3: A knowledge base from multilingual wikipedias. In Proceedings of the 7th biennial conference on innovative data systems research.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  19. Tom Mitchell and Edward Fredkin. 2014. Never ending language learning. In Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Big Data. 1–1.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  20. Arvind Neelakantan, Benjamin Roth, and Andrew McCallum. 2015. Compositional vector space models for knowledge base completion. In Proceedings of the 53rd Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics and the 7th International Joint Conference on Natural Language Processing. 156–166.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  21. Tim Rocktäschel and Sebastian Riedel. 2017. End-to-end Differentiable Proving. In Proceedings of the 30th International Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems. 3788–3800.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  22. Zhiqing Sun, Zhi-Hong Deng, Jian-Yun Nie, 2019. RotatE: Knowledge Graph Embedding by Relational Rotation in Complex Space. In Proceedings of the 7th International Conference on Learning Representations.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  23. Quan Wang, Jing Liu, Yuanfei Luo, 2016. Knowledge base completion via coupled path ranking. In Proceedings of the 54th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistic. 1308–1318.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  24. Zhen Wang, Jianwen Zhang, Jianlin Feng, 2014. Knowledge graph embedding by translating on hyperplanes. In Proceedings of the 28th AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence. 1112–1119.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  25. Yongliang Wu and Shuliang Zhao. 2021. Community answer generation based on knowledge graph. Information Sciences(2021), 132–152.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  26. Lijie Xie, Zhaoming Hu, Xingjuan Cai, 2021. Explainable recommendation based on knowledge graph and multi-objective optimization. Complex & Intelligent Systems(2021), 1241–1252.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  27. Wenhan Xiong, Thien Hoang, and William Yang Wang. 2017. Deeppath: a reinforcement learning method for knowledge graph reasoning. In Proceedings of the 22nd Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing. 564–573.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  28. Fan Yang, Zhilin Yang, and William W. Cohen. 2017. Differentiable learning of logical rules for knowledge base reasoning. In Proceedings of the 31st International Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems. 2316–2325.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar

Index Terms

  1. Multi-hop Knowledge Graph Reasoning Based on Hyperbolic Knowledge Graph Embedding and Reinforcement Learning
          Index terms have been assigned to the content through auto-classification.

          Recommendations

          Comments

          Login options

          Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

          Sign in
          • Published in

            cover image ACM Other conferences
            IJCKG '21: Proceedings of the 10th International Joint Conference on Knowledge Graphs
            December 2021
            204 pages

            Copyright © 2021 ACM

            Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

            Publisher

            Association for Computing Machinery

            New York, NY, United States

            Publication History

            • Published: 24 January 2022

            Permissions

            Request permissions about this article.

            Request Permissions

            Check for updates

            Qualifiers

            • research-article
            • Research
            • Refereed limited

          PDF Format

          View or Download as a PDF file.

          PDF

          eReader

          View online with eReader.

          eReader

          HTML Format

          View this article in HTML Format .

          View HTML Format