skip to main content
research-article

Incorporating Multi-Level Sampling with Adaptive Aggregation for Inductive Knowledge Graph Completion

Published:26 March 2024Publication History
Skip Abstract Section

Abstract

In recent years, Graph Neural Networks (GNNs) have achieved unprecedented success in handling graph-structured data, thereby driving the development of numerous GNN-oriented techniques for inductive knowledge graph completion (KGC). A key limitation of existing methods, however, is their dependence on pre-defined aggregation functions, which lack the adaptability to diverse data, resulting in suboptimal performance on established benchmarks. Another challenge arises from the exponential increase in irrelated entities as the reasoning path lengthens, introducing unwarranted noise and consequently diminishing the model’s generalization capabilities. To surmount these obstacles, we design an innovative framework that synergizes Multi-Level Sampling with an Adaptive Aggregation mechanism (MLSAA). Distinctively, our model couples GNNs with enhanced set transformers, enabling dynamic selection of the most appropriate aggregation function tailored to specific datasets and tasks. This adaptability significantly boosts both the model’s flexibility and its expressive capacity. Additionally, we unveil a unique sampling strategy designed to selectively filter irrelevant entities, while retaining potentially beneficial targets throughout the reasoning process. We undertake an exhaustive evaluation of our novel inductive KGC method across three pivotal benchmark datasets and the experimental results corroborate the efficacy of MLSAA.

REFERENCES

  1. [1] Ba Lei Jimmy, Kiros Jamie Ryan, and Hinton Geoffrey E.. 2016. Layer normalization. arXiv:1607.06450. Retrieved from https://arxiv.org/abs/1607.06450Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  2. [2] Baek Jinheon, Kang Minki, and Hwang Sung Ju. 2021. Accurate learning of graph representations with graph multiset pooling. In Proceedings of the 9th International Conference on Learning Representations.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  3. [3] Balin Muhammed Fatih and Çatalyürek Ümit V.. 2022. (LA)yer-neigh(BOR) sampling: Defusing neighborhood explosion in GNNs. abs/2210.13339. Retrieved from https://arxiv.org/abs/2210.13339Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  4. [4] Battaglia Peter W., Hamrick Jessica B., Bapst Victor, Sanchez-Gonzalez Alvaro, Zambaldi Vinícius Flores, Malinowski Mateusz, Tacchetti Andrea, Raposo David, Santoro Adam, Faulkner Ryan, Gülçehre Çaglar, Song H. Francis, Ballard Andrew J., Gilmer Justin, Dahl George E., Vaswani Ashish, Allen Kelsey R., Nash Charles, Langston Victoria, Dyer Chris, Heess Nicolas, Wierstra Daan, Kohli Pushmeet, Botvinick Matthew M., Vinyals Oriol, Li Yujia, and Pascanu Razvan. 2018. Relational inductive biases, deep learning, and graph networks. arXiv:1806.01261. Retrieved from https://arxiv.org/abs/1806.01261Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  5. [5] Bordes Antoine, Usunier Nicolas, García-Durán Alberto, Weston Jason, and Yakhnenko Oksana. 2013. Translating embeddings for modeling multi-relational data. In Proceedings of the Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 26: 27th Annual Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems 2013. 27872795.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  6. [6] Chen Jie, Ma Tengfei, and Xiao Cao. 2018. FastGCN: Fast learning with graph convolutional networks via importance sampling. In Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on Learning Representations.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  7. [7] Chen Ling, Tang Xing, Chen Weiqi, Qian Yuntao, Li Yansheng, and Zhang Yongjun. 2022. DACHA: A dual graph convolution based temporal knowledge graph representation learning method using historical relation. ACM Transactions on Knowledge Discovery from Data 16, 3 (2022), 46:1–46:18.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  8. [8] Chiang Wei-Lin, Liu Xuanqing, Si Si, Li Yang, Bengio Samy, and Hsieh Cho-Jui. 2019. Cluster-GCN: An efficient algorithm for training deep and large graph convolutional networks. In Proceedings of the 25th ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. 257266.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  9. [9] Chien Eli, Pan Chao, Peng Jianhao, and Milenkovic Olgica. 2022. You are AllSet: A multiset function framework for hypergraph neural networks. In Proceedings of the 10th International Conference on Learning Representations..Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  10. [10] Dettmers Tim, Minervini Pasquale, Stenetorp Pontus, and Riedel Sebastian. 2018. Convolutional 2D knowledge graph embeddings. In Proceedings of the 32nd AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence. 18111818.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  11. [11] Galárraga Luis, Teflioudi Christina, Hose Katja, and Suchanek Fabian M.. 2015. Fast rule mining in ontological knowledge bases with AMIE+. The VLDB Journal 24, 6 (2015), 707730.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  12. [12] García-Durán Alberto, Niepert Mathias, and Stuckenschmidt Heiner. 2017. Kern: Kernel embeddings of categorical data. In Proceedings of the International Semantic Web Conference. Springer, 210218.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  13. [13] Garnelo Marta, Rosenbaum Dan, Maddison Christopher, Ramalho Tiago, Saxton David, Shanahan Murray, Teh Yee Whye, Rezende Danilo Jimenez, and Eslami S. M. Ali. 2018. Conditional neural processes. In Proceedings of the 35th International Conference on Machine Learning. 16901699.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  14. [14] Gilmer Justin, Schoenholz Samuel S., Riley Patrick F., Vinyals Oriol, and Dahl George E.. 2017. Neural message passing for quantum chemistry. In Proceedings of the 34th International Conference on Machine Learning. 12631272.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  15. [15] Hamilton William L., Ying Zhitao, and Leskovec Jure. 2017. Inductive representation learning on large graphs. In Proceedings of the Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 30: Annual Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems 2017. 10241034.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  16. [16] Ho Vinh Thinh, Stepanova Daria, Gad-Elrab Mohamed H., Kharlamov Evgeny, and Weikum Gerhard. 2018. Rule learning from knowledge graphs guided by embedding models. In Proceedings of the Semantic Web - ISWC 2018-17th International Semantic Web Conference. 7290.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  17. [17] Hu Weihua, Fey Matthias, Zitnik Marinka, Dong Yuxiao, Ren Hongyu, Liu Bowen, Catasta Michele, and Leskovec Jure. 2020. Open graph benchmark: Datasets for machine learning on graphs. In Proceedings of the Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 33: Annual Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems 2020, NeurIPS 2020, December 6–12, 2020, virtual.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  18. [18] Huang Wen-bing, Zhang Tong, Rong Yu, and Huang Junzhou. 2018. Adaptive sampling towards fast graph representation learning. In Proceedings of the Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 31: Annual Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems 2018, NeurIPS 2018, December 3–8, 2018, Montréal, Canada. 45634572.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  19. [19] Kingma Diederik P. and Ba Jimmy. 2015. Adam: A method for stochastic optimization. In Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on Learning Representations, ICLR 2015, San Diego, CA, USA, May 7–9, 2015, Conference Track Proceedings.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  20. [20] Thomas N. Kipf and Max Welling. 2017. Semi-supervised classification with graph convolutional networks. In Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Learning Representations.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  21. [21] Lacroix Timothée, Usunier Nicolas, and Obozinski Guillaume. 2018. Canonical tensor decomposition for knowledge base completion. In Proceedings of the 35th International Conference on Machine Learning. 28692878.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  22. [22] Lee Juho, Lee Yoonho, Kim Jungtaek, Kosiorek Adam R., Choi Seungjin, and Teh Yee Whye. 2019. Set transformer: A framework for attention-based permutation-invariant neural networks. In Proceedings of the 36th International Conference on Machine Learning. 37443753.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  23. [23] Lopez-Paz David, Nishihara Robert, Chintala Soumith, Schölkopf Bernhard, and Bottou Léon. 2017. Discovering causal signals in images. In Proceedings of the 2017 IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition. 5866.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  24. [24] Meilicke Christian, Fink Manuel, Wang Yanjie, Ruffinelli Daniel, Gemulla Rainer, and Stuckenschmidt Heiner. 2018. Fine-grained evaluation of rule- and embedding-based systems for knowledge graph completion. In Proceedings of the Semantic Web - ISWC 2018-17th International Semantic Web Conference. 320.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  25. [25] Murphy Ryan L., Srinivasan Balasubramaniam, Rao Vinayak A., and Ribeiro Bruno. 2019. Janossy pooling: Learning deep permutation-invariant functions for variable-size inputs. In Proceedings of the 7th International Conference on Learning Representations.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  26. [26] Nathani Deepak, Chauhan Jatin, Sharma Charu, and Kaul Manohar. 2019. Learning attention-based embeddings for relation prediction in knowledge graphs. In Proceedings of the 57th Conference of the Association for Computational Linguistics. 47104723.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  27. [27] Neelakantan Arvind, Roth Benjamin, and McCallum Andrew. 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 of the Asian Federation of Natural Language Processing. 156166.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  28. [28] Paszke Adam, Gross Sam, Chintala Soumith, Chanan Gregory, Yang Edward, DeVito Zachary, Lin Zeming, Desmaison Alban, Antiga Luca, and Lerer Adam. 2017. Automatic differentiation in pytorch. In Proceedings of the Neural Information Processing Systems.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  29. [29] Qi Charles Ruizhongtai, Su Hao, Mo Kaichun, and Guibas Leonidas J.. 2017. PointNet: Deep learning on point sets for 3D classification and segmentation. In Proceedings of the 2017 IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition. 7785.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  30. [30] Sadeghian Ali, Armandpour Mohammadreza, Ding Patrick, and Wang Daisy Zhe. 2019. DRUM: End-to-end differentiable rule mining on knowledge graphs. In Proceedings of the Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32: Annual Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems 2019. 1532115331.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  31. [31] Schlichtkrull Michael Sejr, Kipf Thomas N., Bloem Peter, Berg Rianne van den, Titov Ivan, and Welling Max. 2018. Modeling relational data with graph convolutional networks. In Proceedings of the Semantic Web - 15th International Conference. 593607.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  32. [32] Shi Zhihao, Liang Xize, and Wang Jie. 2023. LMC: Fast training of GNNs via subgraph sampling with provable convergence. In Proceedings of the 11th International Conference on Learning Representations.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  33. [33] Snell Jake, Swersky Kevin, and Zemel Richard S.. 2017. Prototypical networks for few-shot learning. In Proceedings of the Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 30: Annual Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems 2017. 40774087.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  34. [34] Socher Richard, Chen Danqi, Manning Christopher D., and Ng Andrew Y.. 2013. Reasoning with neural tensor networks for knowledge base completion. In Proceedings of the Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 26: 27th Annual Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems 2013. 926934.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  35. [35] Sun Zhiqing, Deng Zhi-Hong, Nie Jian-Yun, and Tang Jian. 2019. RotatE: Knowledge graph embedding by relational rotation in complex space. In Proceedings of the 7th International Conference on Learning Representations.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  36. [36] Teru Komal K., Denis Etienne G., and Hamilton William L.. 2020. Inductive relation prediction by subgraph reasoning. In Proceedings of the 37th International Conference on Machine Learning. 94489457.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  37. [37] Toutanova Kristina and Chen Danqi. 2015. Observed versus latent features for knowledge base and text inference. In Proceedings of the 3rd Workshop on Continuous Vector Space Models and their Compositionality. 5766.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  38. [38] Toutanova Kristina, Chen Danqi, Pantel Patrick, Poon Hoifung, Choudhury Pallavi, and Gamon Michael. 2015. Representing text for joint embedding of text and knowledge bases. In Proceedings of the 2015 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing. 14991509.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  39. [39] Vashishth Shikhar, Sanyal Soumya, Nitin Vikram, and Talukdar Partha P.. 2020. Composition-based multi-relational graph convolutional networks. In Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Learning Representations.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  40. [40] Wagstaff Edward, Fuchs Fabian, Engelcke Martin, Posner Ingmar, and Osborne Michael A.. 2019. On the limitations of representing functions on sets. In Proceedings of the 36th International Conference on Machine Learning. 64876494.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  41. [41] Wang Hongwei, Zhang Fuzheng, Wang Jialin, Zhao Miao, Li Wenjie, Xie Xing, and Guo Minyi. 2018. RippleNet: Propagating user preferences on the knowledge graph for recommender systems. In Proceedings of the 27th ACM International Conference on Information and Knowledge Management. 417426.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  42. [42] Wang Jiapu, Wang Boyue, Gao Junbin, Hu Simin, Hu Yongli, and Yin Baocai. 2024. Multi-level interaction based knowledge graph completion. IEEE/ACM Transactions on Audio, Speech, and Language Processing 32 (2024), 386396.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  43. [43] Wang Jiapu, Wang Boyue, Gao Junbin, Hu Yongli, and Yin Baocai. 2023. Multi-concept representation learning for knowledge graph completion. ACM Transactions on Knowledge Discovery from Data 17, 1 (2023), 11:1–11:19.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  44. [44] Wang Jiapu, Wang Boyue, Gao Junbin, Li Xiaoyan, Hu Yongli, and Yin Baocai. 2023. TDN: Triplet distributor network for knowledge graph completion. IEEE Transactions on Knowledge and Data Engineering 35, 12 (2023), 1300213014.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  45. [45] Wang Jiapu, Wang Boyue, Qiu Meikang, Pan Shirui, Xiong Bo, Liu Heng, Luo Linhao, Liu Tengfei, Hu Yongli, Yin Baocai, and Gao Wen. 2023. A survey on temporal knowledge graph completion: Taxonomy, progress, and prospects. arXiv:2308.02457. Retrieved from https://arxiv.org/abs/2308.02457Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  46. [46] Wang Xiang, He Xiangnan, Cao Yixin, Liu Meng, and Chua Tat-Seng. 2019. KGAT: Knowledge graph attention network for recommendation. In Proceedings of the 25th ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. 950958.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  47. [47] Wang Yashen, Ouyang Xiaoye, Guo Dayu, and Zhu Xiaoling. 2024. MEGA: Meta-graph augmented pre-training model for knowledge graph completion. ACM Transactions on Knowledge Discovery from Data 18, 1 (2024), 30:1–30:24.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  48. [48] Xiong Wenhan, Hoang Thien, and Wang William Yang. 2017. DeepPath: A reinforcement learning method for knowledge graph reasoning. In Proceedings of the 2017 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing. 564573.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  49. [49] Yang Bishan, Yih Wen-tau, He Xiaodong, Gao Jianfeng, and Deng Li. 2015. Embedding entities and relations for learning and inference in knowledge bases. In Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on Learning Representations.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  50. [50] Yang Fan, Yang Zhilin, and Cohen William W.. 2017. Differentiable learning of logical rules for knowledge base reasoning. In Proceedings of the Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 30: Annual Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems 2017. 23192328.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  51. [51] Yoon Minji, Gervet Théophile, Shi Baoxu, Niu Sufeng, He Qi, and Yang Jaewon. 2021. Performance-adaptive sampling strategy towards fast and accurate graph neural networks. In Proceedings of the 27th ACM SIGKDD Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining, 2021. 20462056.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  52. [52] Zaheer Manzil, Kottur Satwik, Ravanbakhsh Siamak, Poczos Barnabas, Salakhutdinov Ruslan, and Smola Alexander AJ. 2017. Deep sets. In Proceedings of the Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems. 33913401.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  53. [53] Zeng Hanqing, Zhang Muhan, Xia Yinglong, Srivastava Ajitesh, Malevich Andrey, Kannan Rajgopal, Prasanna Viktor K., Jin Long, and Chen Ren. 2021. Decoupling the depth and scope of graph neural networks. In Proceedings of the Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 34: Annual Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems 2021. 1966519679.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  54. [54] Zeng Hanqing, Zhou Hongkuan, Srivastava Ajitesh, Kannan Rajgopal, and Prasanna Viktor K.. 2020. GraphSAINT: Graph sampling based inductive learning method. In Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Learning Representations.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  55. [55] Zhang Yuyu, Dai Hanjun, Kozareva Zornitsa, Smola Alexander J., and Song Le. 2018. Variational reasoning for question answering with knowledge graph. In Proceedings of the 32nd AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence. 60696076.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  56. [56] Zhang Yuxuan, Li Yuanxiang, Zhang Yini, Wang Yilin, Yang Yongshen, Wei Xian, and Luo Jianhua. 2023. Missing-edge aware knowledge graph inductive inference through dual graph learning and traversing. Expert Systems with Applications 213, Part B (2023), 118969.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  57. [57] Zhang Yongqi and Yao Quanming. 2022. Knowledge graph reasoning with relational digraph. In Proceedings of the ACM Web Conference 2022. 912924.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  58. [58] Zhang Zhengyan, Han Xu, Liu Zhiyuan, Jiang Xin, Sun Maosong, and Liu Qun. 2019. ERNIE: Enhanced language representation with informative entities. In Proceedings of the 57th Conference of the Association for Computational Linguistics. 14411451.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  59. [59] Zhu Zhaocheng, Zhang Zuobai, Xhonneux Louis-Pascal A. C., and Tang Jian. 2021. Neural bellman-ford networks: A general graph neural network framework for link prediction. In Proceedings of the Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 34: Annual Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems 2021. 2947629490.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  60. [60] Zou Difan, Hu Ziniu, Wang Yewen, Jiang Song, Sun Yizhou, and Gu Quanquan. 2019. Layer-dependent importance sampling for training deep and large graph convolutional networks. In Proceedings of the Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32: Annual Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems 2019. 1124711256.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar

Index Terms

  1. Incorporating Multi-Level Sampling with Adaptive Aggregation for Inductive Knowledge Graph Completion

          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

          Full Access

          • Published in

            cover image ACM Transactions on Knowledge Discovery from Data
            ACM Transactions on Knowledge Discovery from Data  Volume 18, Issue 5
            June 2024
            699 pages
            ISSN:1556-4681
            EISSN:1556-472X
            DOI:10.1145/3613659
            Issue’s Table of Contents

            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 the author(s) 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: 26 March 2024
            • Online AM: 7 February 2024
            • Accepted: 29 January 2024
            • Received: 16 October 2023
            Published in tkdd Volume 18, Issue 5

            Permissions

            Request permissions about this article.

            Request Permissions

            Check for updates

            Qualifiers

            • research-article
          • Article Metrics

            • Downloads (Last 12 months)154
            • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)26

            Other Metrics

          PDF Format

          View or Download as a PDF file.

          PDF

          eReader

          View online with eReader.

          eReader

          Full Text

          View this article in Full Text.

          View Full Text