Measuring Accuracy of Triples in Knowledge Graphs

An increasing amount of large-scale knowledge graphs have been constructed in recent years. Those graphs are often created from text-based extraction, which could be very noisy. So far, cleaning knowledge graphs are often carried out by human experts and thus very inefficient. It is necessary to explore automatic methods for identifying and eliminating erroneous information. In order to achieve this, previous approaches primarily rely on internal information i.e. the knowledge graph itself. In this paper, we introduce an automatic approach, Triples Accuracy Assessment (TAA), for validating RDF triples (source triples) in a knowledge graph by finding consensus of matched triples (among target triples) from other knowledge graphs. TAA uses knowledge graph interlinks to find identical resources and apply different matching methods between the predicates of source triples and target triples. Then based on the matched triples, TAA calculates a confidence score to indicate the correctness of a source triple. In addition, we present an evaluation of our approach using the FactBench dataset for fact validation. Our findings show promising results for distinguishing between correct and wrong triples

Search strategies of Wikipedia readers

The quest for information is one of the most common activity of human beings. Despite the the impressive progress of search engines, not to miss the needed piece of information could be still very tough, as well as to acquire specific competences and knowledge by shaping and following the proper learning paths. Indeed, the need to find sensible paths in information networks is one of the biggest challenges of our societies and, to effectively address it, it is important to investigate the strategies adopted by human users to cope with the cognitive bottleneck of finding their way in a growing sea of information. Here we focus on the case of Wikipedia and investigate a recently released dataset about users’ click on the English Wikipedia, namely the English Wikipedia Clickstream. We perform a semantically charged analysis to uncover the general patterns followed by information seekers in the multi-dimensional space of Wikipedia topics/categories. We discover the existence of well defined strategies in which users tend to start from very general, i.e., semantically broad, pages and progressively narrow down the scope of their navigation, while keeping a growing semantic coherence. This is unlike strategies associated to tasks with predefined search goals, namely the case of the Wikispeedia game. In this case users first move from the ‘particular’ to the ‘universal’ before focusing down again to the required target. The clear picture offered here represents a very important stepping stone towards a better design of information networks and recommendation strategies, as well as the construction of radically new learning paths

Cross-Lingual Classification of Crisis Data

Many citizens nowadays flock to social media during crises to share or acquire the latest information about the event. Due to the sheer volume of data typically circulated during such events, it is necessary to be able to efficiently filter out irrelevant posts, thus focusing attention on the posts that are truly relevant to the crisis. Current methods for classifying the relevance of posts to a crisis or set of crises typically struggle to deal with posts in different languages, and it is not viable during rapidly evolving crisis situations to train new models for each language. In this paper we test statistical and semantic classification approaches on cross-lingual datasets from 30 crisis events, consisting of posts written mainly in English, Spanish, and Italian. We experiment with scenarios where the model is trained on one language and tested on another, and where the data is translated to a single language. We show that the addition of semantic features extracted from external knowledge bases improve accuracy over a purely statistical model

Human-Level Performance on Word Analogy Questions by Latent Relational Analysis

This paper introduces Latent Relational Analysis (LRA), a method for measuring relational similarity. LRA has potential applications in many areas, including information extraction, word sense disambiguation, machine translation, and information retrieval. Relational similarity is correspondence between relations, in contrast with attributional similarity, which is correspondence between attributes. When two words have a high degree of attributional similarity, we call them synonyms. When two pairs of words have a high degree of relational similarity, we say that their relations are analogous. For example, the word pair mason/stone is analogous to the pair carpenter/wood; the relations between mason and stone are highly similar to the relations between carpenter and wood. Past work on semantic similarity measures has mainly been concerned with attributional similarity. For instance, Latent Semantic Analysis (LSA) can measure the degree of similarity between two words, but not between two relations. Recently the Vector Space Model (VSM) of information retrieval has been adapted to the task of measuring relational similarity, achieving a score of 47% on a collection of 374 college-level multiple-choice word analogy questions. In the VSM approach, the relation between a pair of words is characterized by a vector of frequencies of predefined patterns in a large corpus. LRA extends the VSM approach in three ways: (1) the patterns are derived automatically from the corpus (they are not predefined), (2) the Singular Value Decomposition (SVD) is used to smooth the frequency data (it is also used this way in LSA), and (3) automatically generated synonyms are used to explore reformulations of the word pairs. LRA achieves 56% on the 374 analogy questions, statistically equivalent to the average human score of 57%. On the related problem of classifying noun-modifier relations, LRA achieves similar gains over the VSM, while using a smaller corpus