Open Access

Learning Context-based Embeddings for Knowledge Graph Completion


Cite

Testing the ability of inferring relation patterns on UMLS.

UMLS

Symmetry Antisymmetry Inversion Composition
ComplEx - 0.8806 0.8615 0.8732
Rotate - 0.9065 0.9069 0.9141
HAKE - 0.8558 0.8650 0.8723
LineaRE - 0.9446 0.9441 0.9490
ContE - 0.9644 0.9622 0.9645

Experimental results for Nations.

Nations

MRR Hits@N

1 3 10
TransE (Antoine et al., 2013) 0.4813 0.2189 0.6667 0.9801
DistMult (Yang et al., 2015) 0.7131 0.5970 0.7761 0.9776
ComplEx (Trouillon et al., 2016) 0.6677 0.5274 0.7413 0.9776
ConvE (Dettmers et al., 2018) 0.5616 0.3470 0.7155 0.9946
Rotate (Sun et al., 2019) 0.7155 0.5796 0.7985 1.0
HAKE (Zhang et al., 2020) 0.7157 0.5945 0.7786 0.9851
LineaRE (Peng & Zhang, 2020) 0.8146 0.7114 0.8881 0.9975
ContE 0.8412 0.7587 0.9179 1.0

Comparison of SOTA baselines and ContE model in terms of time complexity and number of parameters.

Models #Parameters Time Complexity
TransE O(ned + nrd) O(d)
NTN O(ned + nrd2k) O(d3)
ComplEx O(ned + nrd) O(d)
TransR O(ned + nrdk) O(dk)
SimplE O(ned + nrd) O(d)
ContE O(ned + 2nrd) O(d)

Summary on datasets.

Dataset |E| |R| |training| |validation| |test|
FB15K-237 14,541 237 272,115 17,535 20,466
UMLS 135 46 5,216 652 661
Nations 14 55 1,592 199 201
Countries_S1 271 2 1,111 24 24
Countries_S2 271 2 1,063 24 24
Countries_S3 271 2 985 24 24

Experimental results for FB15K-237.

FB15K-237

MRR Hits@N

1 3 10
TransE (Antoine et al., 2013) 0.279 0.198 0.376 0.441
DistMult (Yang et al., 2015) 0.281 0.199 0.301 0.446
ComplEx (Trouillon et al., 2016) 0.278 0.194 0.297 0.45
ConvE (Dettmers et al., 2018) 0.312 0.225 0.341 0.497
ConvKB (Nguyen et al., 2018) 0.289 0.198 0.324 0.471
R-GCN (Schlichtkrull et al., 2018) 0.164 0.10 0.181 0.30
SimplE (Seyed & David, 2018) 0.169 0.095 0.179 0.327
CapsE (Nguyen et al., 2019) 0.150 - - 0.356
Rotate (Sun et al., 2019) 0.338 0.241 0.375 0.533
ContE 0.3445 0.2454 0.3823 0.5383

Experimental results for UMLS.

UMLS

MRR Hits@N

1 3 10
TransE (Antoine et al., 2013) 0.7966 0.6452 0.9418 0.9841
DistMult (Yang et al., 2015) 0.868 0.821 - 0.967
ComplEx (Trouillon et al., 2016) 0.8753 0.7942 0.9531 0.9713
ConvE (Dettmers et al., 2018) 0.957 0.932 - 0.994
NeuralLP (Yang, Zhang, & Cohen, 2017) 0.778 0.643 - 0.962
NTP-λ (Rocktaschel et al., 2017) 0.912 0.843 - 1.0
MINERVA (Das et al., 2018) 0.825 0.728 - 0.968
KGRRS+ComplEx (Lin et al., 2018) 0.929 0.887 - 0.985
KGRRS+ConvE (Lin et al., 2018) 0.940 0.902 - 0.992
Rotate (Sun et al., 2019) 0.9274 0.8744 0.9788 0.9947
HAKE (Zhang et al., 2020) 0.8928 0.8366 0.9387 0.9849
LineaRE (Peng & Zhang, 2020) 0.9508 0.9145 0.9856 0.9992
ContE 0.9677 0.9501 0.9811 1.0

Parameters and scoring functions in SOTA baselines and in ContE model.

Model Scoring function ψ(e1,r,e2) Parameters
TransE ||νe1 + νrνe2||p νe1, νr, νe2 ∈ ℝd
ComplEx Re(<νe1,νr,ν¯e2>) {{ Re}} \left( { < {\nu _{{e_1}}},{\nu _r},{{\bar \nu }_{{e_2}}} > } \right) νe1, νr, νe2 ∈ ℂd
SimplE 12(<he1,νr,te2>+<he2,νr1,te1>) {1 \over 2}\left( { < {h_{{e_1}}},{\nu _r},{t_{{e_2}}} > + < {h_{{e_2}}},{\nu _{{r^{ - 1}}}},{t_{{e_1}}} > } \right) he1, νr, te2, he2, νr−1, te1 ∈ ℝd
ConvE g(vec(g(concat(v^e1,νr)*Ω))W)νe2 g\left( {vec\left( {g\left( {concat\left( {{{\hat v}_{{e_1}}},{\nu _r}} \right)*\Omega } \right)} \right)W} \right) \cdot {\nu _{{e_2}}} νe1, νr, νe2 ∈ ℝd
ConvKB concat(g([νe1, νr, νe2] * Ω)) · w νe1, νr, νe2 ∈ ℂd
Rotate ||νe1νrνe2|| νe1, νe2, νr, ∈ Cd
HAKE ||νe1mνrmνe2m||2 νe1m,νe2mRd,νrmR+d {\nu _{e{1_m}}},{\nu _{e{2_m}}} \in {R^d},{\nu _{{r_m}}} \in R_ + ^d
λ ||sin(νe1p + νrpνe2p)||1 νe1p, rp, νe2p ∈ [0, 2π)d
ContE < fr + νe1, br + νe2 > νe1, νe2, fr, br, ∈ ℝd

Experimental results for Countries.S2 and Countries.S3.

Countries_S2 Countries_S3


MRR Hits@N MRR Hits@N


1 3 10 1 3 10
TransE 0.6997 0.50 0.9375 1.0 0.1206 0.00 0.0833 0.3542
DistMult 0.7813 0.5833 1.0 1.0 0.2496 0.0625 0.333 0.6250
ComplEx 0.7934 0.6042 0.9792 1.0 0.2731 0.0833 0.3958 0.6667
Rotate 0.6979 0.4792 0.9583 1.0 0.1299 0.00 0.0833 0.4792
HAKE 0.6667 0.4583 0.8333 0.9583 0.2472 0.0625 0.3333 0.5417
LineaRE 0.7873 0.6458 0.9583 0.9792 0.2393 0.0625 0.3542 0.5208
ContE 0.8370 0.7292 0.9583 0.9792 0.4695 0.3542 0.5 0.625

Relation pattern modeling and inference abilities of baseline models.

Model Symmetry Antisymmetry Inversion Composition
TransE (Antoine et al., 2013) ×
DistMult (Yang et al., 2015) × × ×
ComplEx (Trouillon et al., 2016) ×
SimplE (Seyed & David, 2018) ×
ConvE (Dettmers et al., 2018)
ConvKB (Nguyen et al., 2018)
RotatE (Sun et al., 2019)
HAKE (Zhang et al., 2020)
KGCR (Pu et al., 2020) ×
LineaRE (Peng & Zhang, 2020)
ContE

Experimental results for Countries.S1.

Countries_S1

MRR Hits@N

1 3 10
TransE (Antoine et al., 2013) 0.8785 0.7708 1.0 1.0
DistMult (Yang et al., 2015) 0.9028 0.8125 1.0 1.0
ComplEx (Trouillon et al., 2016) 0.9792 0.9583 1.0 1.0
Rotate (Sun et al., 2019) 0.8750 0.7708 1.0 1.0
HAKE (Zhang et al., 2020) 0.9045 0.8333 0.9792 1.0
LineaRE (Peng & Zhang, 2020) 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0
ContE 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0

Testing the ability of inferring relation patterns on Nations.

Nations

Symmetry Antisymmetry Inversion Composition
ComplEx - 0.6499 0.6487 0.6499
Rotate - 0.6825 0.6970 0.6907
HAKE - 0.6953 0.6835 0.6844
LineaRE - 0.8189 0.8240 0.8333
ContE - 0.8256 0.8326 0.8303
eISSN:
2543-683X
Language:
English
Publication timeframe:
4 times per year
Journal Subjects:
Computer Sciences, Information Technology, Project Management, Databases and Data Mining