Advertisement

Formal Query Generation for Question Answering over Knowledge Bases

  • Hamid Zafar
  • Giulio Napolitano
  • Jens Lehmann
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 10843)

Abstract

Question answering (QA) systems often consist of several components such as Named Entity Disambiguation (NED), Relation Extraction (RE), and Query Generation (QG). In this paper, we focus on the QG process of a QA pipeline on a large-scale Knowledge Base (KB), with noisy annotations and complex sentence structures. We therefore propose SQG, a SPARQL Query Generator with modular architecture, enabling easy integration with other components for the construction of a fully functional QA pipeline. SQG can be used on large open-domain KBs and handle noisy inputs by discovering a minimal subgraph based on uncertain inputs, that it receives from the NED and RE components. This ability allows SQG to consider a set of candidate entities/relations, as opposed to the most probable ones, which leads to a significant boost in the performance of the QG component. The captured subgraph covers multiple candidate walks, which correspond to SPARQL queries. To enhance the accuracy, we present a ranking model based on Tree-LSTM that takes into account the syntactical structure of the question and the tree representation of the candidate queries to find the one representing the correct intention behind the question. SQG outperforms the baseline systems and achieves a macro F1-measure of 75% on the LC-QuAD dataset.

Notes

Acknowledgment

This research was supported by EU H2020 grants for the projects HOBBIT (GA no. 688227) and WDAqua (GA no. 642795) as well as by German Federal Ministry of Education and Research (BMBF) funding for the project SOLIDE (no. 13N14456).

References

  1. 1.
    Diefenbach, D., Lopez, V., Singh, K., Maret, P.: Core techniques of question answering systems over knowledge bases: a survey. Knowl. Inf. Syst. 55, 1–41 (2017)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Kim, J.-D., Unger, C., Ngomo, A.-C.N., Freitas, A., Hahm, Y.-G., Kim, J., Nam, S., Choi, G.-H., Kim, J.-U., Usbeck, R., et al.: OKBQA framework for collaboration on developing natural language question answering systems (2017)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Singh, K., Radhakrishna, A.S., Both, A., Shekarpour, S., Lytra, I., Usbeck, R., Vyas, A., Khikmatullaev, A., Punjani, D., Lange, C., Vidal, M.E., Lehmann, J., Auer, S.: Why reinvent the wheel–lets build question answering systems together. In: The Web Conference (WWW 2018) (2018, to appear )Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Höffner, K., Walter, S., Marx, E., Usbeck, R., Lehmann, J., Ngomo, A.-C.N.: Survey on challenges of question answering in the semantic web. Semant. Web 8(6), 895–920 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Auer, S., Bizer, C., Kobilarov, G., Lehmann, J., Cyganiak, R., Ives, Z.: DBpedia: a nucleus for a web of open data. In: Nixon, L., 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_52CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Bollacker, K., Evans, C., Paritosh, P., Sturge, T., Taylor, J.: Freebase: a collaboratively created graph database for structuring human knowledge. In: Proceedings of the 2008 ACM SIGMOD International Conference on Management of Data, pp. 1247–1250. ACM (2008)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Bast, H., Haussmann, E.: More accurate question answering on freebase. In: Proceedings of the 24th ACM International on Conference on Information and Knowledge Management, pp. 1431–1440. ACM (2015)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Abujabal, A., Yahya, M., Riedewald, M., Weikum, G.: Automated template generation for question answering over knowledge graphs. In: Proceedings of the 26th International Conference on World Wide Web, pp. 1191–1200 (2017)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    He, S., Zhang, Y., Liu, K., Zhao, J.: CASIA@ V2: a MLN-based question answering system over linked data (2014)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Dubey, M., Dasgupta, S., Sharma, A., Höffner, K., Lehmann, J.: AskNow: a framework for natural language query formalization in SPARQL. In: Sack, H., Blomqvist, E., d’Aquin, M., Ghidini, C., Ponzetto, S.P., Lange, C. (eds.) ESWC 2016. LNCS, vol. 9678, pp. 300–316. Springer, Cham (2016).  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-34129-3_19CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Shekarpour, S., Marx, E., Ngomo, A.-C.N., Auer, S.: SINA: semantic interpretation of user queries for question answering on interlinked data. Web Semant. Sci. Serv. Agents World Wide Web 30, 39–51 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Lukovnikov, D., Fischer, A., Lehmann, J., Auer, S.: Neural network-based question answering over knowledge graphs on word and character level. In: Proceedings of the 26th International Conference on World Wide Web, pp. 1211–1220. International World Wide Web Conferences Steering Committee (2017)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Fader, A., Zettlemoyer, L., Etzioni, O.: Paraphrase-driven learning for open question answering. In: Proceedings of the 51st Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics, vol. 1, pp. 1608–1618 (2013)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Berant, J., Chou, A., Frostig, R., Liang, P.: Semantic parsing on freebase from question-answer pairs. In: Proceedings of the 2013 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing, pp. 1533–1544 (2013)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Lehmann, J., Isele, R., Jakob, M., Jentzsch, A., Kontokostas, D., Mendes, P., Hellmann, S., Morsey, M., van Kleef, P., Auer, S., Bizer, C.: DBpedia - a large-scale, multilingual knowledge base extracted from wikipedia. Semant. Web J. 6(2), 167–195 (2015)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Yih, S.W., Chang, M.-W., He, X., Gao, J.: Semantic parsing via staged query graph generation: question answering with knowledge base (2015)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Lopez, V., Fernández, M., Motta, E., Stieler, N.: PowerAqua: supporting users in querying and exploring the semantic web. Semant. Web 3, 249–265 (2012)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Tai, K.S., Socher, R., Manning, C.D.: Improved semantic representations from tree-structured long short-term memory networks. In: Long Papers ACL 2015, Beijing, China, July 26–31 2015, vol. 1, pp. 1556–1566 (2015)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Bengio, Y., Simard, P., Frasconi, P.: Learning long-term dependencies with gradient descent is difficult. IEEE Trans. Neural Netw. 5, 157–166 (1994)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Hochreiter, S., Schmidhuber, J.: Long short-term memory. Neural Comput. 9(8), 1735–1780 (1997)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Pennington, J., Socher, R., Manning, C.: Glove: global vectors for word representation. In: Proceedings of the 2014 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing (EMNLP), pp. 1532–1543 (2014)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Trivedi, P., Dubey, M.: A corpus for complex question answering over knowledge graphs. In: 16th International Semantic Web Conference (2017)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Ferragina, P., Scaiella, U.: Fast and accurate annotation of short texts with wikipedia pages. IEEE Softw. 29(1), 70–75 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Dubey, M., Banerjee, D., Chaudhuri, D., Lehmann, J.: EARL: joint entity and relation linking for question answering over knowledge graphs (2018)Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Chen, D., Manning, C.: A fast and accurate dependency parser using neural networks. In: Proceedings of the 2014 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing (EMNLP), pp. 740–750 (2014)Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Mueller, J., Thyagarajan, A.: Siamese recurrent architectures for learning sentence similarity (2016)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Computer Science InstituteUniversity of BonnBonnGermany
  2. 2.Fraunhofer IAISSankt AugustinGermany

Personalised recommendations