Assessing the quality of an evolving knowledge base is a challenging task as
it often requires to identify correct quality assessment procedures.
Since data is often derived from autonomous, and increasingly large data
sources, it is impractical to manually curate the data, and challenging to
continuously and automatically assess their quality.
In this paper, we explore two main areas of quality assessment related to
evolving knowledge bases: (i) identification of completeness issues using
knowledge base evolution analysis, and (ii) identification of consistency
issues based on integrity constraints, such as minimum and maximum cardinality,
and range constraints.
For completeness analysis, we use data profiling information from consecutive
knowledge base releases to estimate completeness measures that allow predicting
quality issues. Then, we perform consistency checks to validate the results of
the completeness analysis using integrity constraints and learning models.
The approach has been tested both quantitatively and qualitatively by using a
subset of datasets from both DBpedia and 3cixty knowledge bases. The
performance of the approach is evaluated using precision, recall, and F1 score.
From completeness analysis, we observe a 94% precision for the English DBpedia
KB and 95% precision for the 3cixty Nice KB. We also assessed the performance
of our consistency analysis by using five learning models over three sub-tasks,
namely minimum cardinality, maximum cardinality, and range constraint. We
observed that the best performing model in our experimental setup is the Random
Forest, reaching an F1 score greater than 90% for minimum and maximum
cardinality and 84% for range constraints.Comment: Accepted for Journal of Web Semantic
