Advertisement

Regularizing Knowledge Graph Embeddings via Equivalence and Inversion Axioms

  • Pasquale MinerviniEmail author
  • Luca Costabello
  • Emir Muñoz
  • Vít Nováček
  • Pierre-Yves Vandenbussche
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 10534)

Abstract

Learning embeddings of entities and relations using neural architectures is an effective method of performing statistical learning on large-scale relational data, such as knowledge graphs. In this paper, we consider the problem of regularizing the training of neural knowledge graph embeddings by leveraging external background knowledge. We propose a principled and scalable method for leveraging equivalence and inversion axioms during the learning process, by imposing a set of model-dependent soft constraints on the predicate embeddings. The method has several advantages: (i) the number of introduced constraints does not depend on the number of entities in the knowledge base; (ii) regularities in the embedding space effectively reflect available background knowledge; (iii) it yields more accurate results in link prediction tasks over non-regularized methods; and (iv) it can be adapted to a variety of models, without affecting their scalability properties. We demonstrate the effectiveness of the proposed method on several large knowledge graphs. Our evaluation shows that it consistently improves the predictive accuracy of several neural knowledge graph embedding models (for instance, the MRR of TransE on WordNet increases by 11%) without compromising their scalability properties.

Notes

Acknowledgements

This work was supported by the TOMOE project funded by Fujitsu Laboratories Ltd., Japan and Insight Centre for Data Analytics at National University of Ireland Galway (supported by the Science Foundation Ireland grant 12/RC/2289).

References

  1. Auer, S., Bizer, C., Kobilarov, G., Lehmann, J., Cyganiak, R., Ives, Z.: DBpedia: a nucleus for a web of open data. In: Aberer, K., et al. (eds.) ASWC/ISWC -2007. LNCS, vol. 4825, pp. 722–735. Springer, Heidelberg (2007).  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-76298-0_52 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Baroni, M., Bernardi, R., Do, N-Q., Shan, C.: Entailment above the word level in distributional semantics. In: EACL, pp. 23–32. The Association for Computer Linguistics (2012)Google Scholar
  3. Bollacker, K.D., Cook, R.P., Tufts, P.: Freebase: a shared database of structured general human knowledge. In: AAAI, pp. 1962–1963. AAAI Press (2007)Google Scholar
  4. Bordes, A., Usunier, N., García-Durán, A., Weston, J., Yakhnenko, O.: Translating embeddings for modeling multi-relational data. In: NIPS, pp. 2787–2795 (2013)Google Scholar
  5. Bordes, A., Glorot, X., Weston, J., Bengio, Y.: A semantic matching energy function for learning with multi-relational data - application to word-sense disambiguation. Mach. Learn. 94(2), 233–259 (2014)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  6. Carlson, A., Betteridge, J., Kisiel, B., Settles, B., Hruschka Jr., E.R., Mitchell, T.M.: Toward an architecture for never-ending language learning. In: AAAI. AAAI Press (2010)Google Scholar
  7. Chang, K.-W., Yih, W., Yang, B., Meek, C.: Typed tensor decomposition of knowledge bases for relation extraction. In: EMNLP, pp. 1568–1579. ACL (2014)Google Scholar
  8. Dong, X., Gabrilovich, E., Heitz, G., Horn, W., Lao, N., Murphy, K., Strohmann, T., Sun, S., Zhang, W.: Knowledge vault: a web-scale approach to probabilistic knowledge fusion. In: KDD, pp. 601–610. ACM (2014)Google Scholar
  9. Duchi, J.C., Hazan, E., Singer, Y.: Adaptive subgradient methods for online learning and stochastic optimization. J. Mach. Learn. Res. 12, 2121–2159 (2011)MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  10. García-Durán, A., Bordes, A., Usunier, N.: Effective blending of two and three-way interactions for modeling multi-relational data. In: ECML-PKDD, pp. 434–449 (2014)Google Scholar
  11. Guu, K., Miller, J., Liang, P.: Traversing knowledge graphs in vector space. In: EMNLP, pp. 318–327. The Association for Computational Linguistics (2015)Google Scholar
  12. Hayes, P., Patel-Schneider, P.: RDF 1.1 semantics. W3C recommendation, W3C, February 2014. http://www.w3.org/TR/2014/REC-rdf11-mt-20140225/
  13. Jenatton, R., Roux, N.L., Bordes, A., Obozinski, G.: A latent factor model for highly multi-relational data. In: NIPS, pp. 3176–3184 (2012)Google Scholar
  14. Krompass, D., Nickel, M., Tresp, V.: Large-scale factorization of type-constrained multi-relational data. In: DSAA, pp. 18–24. IEEE (2014)Google Scholar
  15. Krompaß, D., Nickel, M., Tresp, V.: Querying factorized probabilistic triple databases. In: Mika, P., et al. (eds.) ISWC 2014. LNCS, vol. 8797, pp. 114–129. Springer, Cham (2014).  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-11915-1_8 Google Scholar
  16. Krompaß, D., Baier, S., Tresp, V.: Type-constrained representation learning in knowledge graphs. In: Arenas, M., et al. (eds.) ISWC 2015. LNCS, vol. 9366, pp. 640–655. Springer, Cham (2015).  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-25007-6_37 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Mahdisoltani, F., Biega, J., Suchanek, F.M.: YAGO3: a knowledge base from multilingual wikipedias. In: CIDR (2015). www.cidrdb.org
  18. Meseguer, P., Rossi, F., Schiex, T.: Soft constraints. In: Handbook of Constraint Programming, of Foundations of Artificial Intelligence, vol. 2, pp. 281–328. Elsevier (2006)Google Scholar
  19. Miller, G.A.: WordNet: a lexical database for english. Commun. ACM 38(11), 39–41 (1995)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Minervini, P., d’Amato, C., Fanizzi, N., Esposito, F.: Leveraging the schema in latent factor models for knowledge graph completion. In: SAC, pp. 327–332. ACM (2016)Google Scholar
  21. Nickel, M., Tresp, V., Kriegel, H.-P.: A three-way model for collective learning on multi-relational data. In: ICML, pp. 809–816 (2011)Google Scholar
  22. Nickel, M., Tresp, V., Kriegel, H.-P.: Factorizing YAGO: scalable machine learning for linked data. In: WWW, pp. 271–280. ACM (2012)Google Scholar
  23. Nickel, M., Jiang, X., Tresp, V.: Reducing the rank in relational factorization models by including observable patterns. In: NIPS, pp. 1179–1187 (2014)Google Scholar
  24. Nickel, M., Murphy, K., Tresp, V., Gabrilovich, E.: A review of relational machine learning for knowledge graphs. Proc. IEEE 104(1), 11–33 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Niepert, M.: Discriminative Gaifman models. In: NIPS, pp. 3405–3413 (2016)Google Scholar
  26. Rocktäschel, T., Singh, S., Riedel, S.: Injecting logical background knowledge into embeddings for relation extraction. In: HLT-NAACL, pp. 1119–1129. The Association for Computational Linguistics (2015)Google Scholar
  27. Schneider, M.: OWL 2 web ontology language RDF-based semantics, 2nd edn. W3C recommendation, W3C, December 2012. http://www.w3.org/TR/2012/REC-owl2-rdf-based-semantics-20121211/
  28. Suchanek, F.M., Kasneci, G., Weikum, G.: YAGO: a core of semantic knowledge. In: WWW, pp. 697–706. ACM (2007)Google Scholar
  29. Trouillon, T., Welbl, J., Riedel, S., Gaussier, É., Bouchard, G.: Complex embeddings for simple link prediction. In: ICML, of JMLR Workshop and Conference Proceedings, vol. 48, pp. 2071–2080. JMLR. org (2016)Google Scholar
  30. Wang, Q., Wang, B., Guo, L.: Knowledge base completion using embeddings and rules. In: IJCAI, pp. 1859–1866. AAAI Press (2015)Google Scholar
  31. Yang, B., Yih, W-t., He, X., Gao, J., Deng, L.: Embedding entities and relations for learning and inference in knowledge bases. In: Proceedings of the International Conference on Learning Representations (ICLR) 2015, May 2015Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  • Pasquale Minervini
    • 1
    Email author
  • Luca Costabello
    • 2
  • Emir Muñoz
    • 1
    • 2
  • Vít Nováček
    • 1
  • Pierre-Yves Vandenbussche
    • 2
  1. 1.Insight Centre for Data AnalyticsNational University of IrelandGalwayIreland
  2. 2.Fujitsu Ireland Ltd.GalwayIreland

Personalised recommendations