Location via proxy:   [ UP ]  
[Report a bug]   [Manage cookies]                
skip to main content
research-article

Efficient knowledge graph accuracy evaluation

Published: 01 July 2019 Publication History
  • Get Citation Alerts
  • Abstract

    Estimation of the accuracy of a large-scale knowledge graph (KG) often requires humans to annotate samples from the graph. How to obtain statistically meaningful estimates for accuracy evaluation while keeping human annotation costs low is a problem critical to the development cycle of a KG and its practical applications. Surprisingly, this challenging problem has largely been ignored in prior research. To address the problem, this paper proposes an efficient sampling and evaluation framework, which aims to provide quality accuracy evaluation with strong statistical guarantee while minimizing human efforts. Motivated by the properties of the annotation cost function observed in practice, we propose the use of cluster sampling to reduce the overall cost. We further apply weighted and two-stage sampling as well as stratification for better sampling designs. We also extend our framework to enable efficient incremental evaluation on evolving KG, introducing two solutions based on stratified sampling and a weighted variant of reservoir sampling. Extensive experiments on real-world datasets demonstrate the effectiveness and efficiency of our proposed solution. Compared to baseline approaches, our best solutions can provide up to 60% cost reduction on static KG evaluation and up to 80% cost reduction on evolving KG evaluation, without loss of evaluation quality.

    References

    [1]
    Dbpedia. https://wiki.dbpedia.org.
    [2]
    Imdb. https://www.imdb.com.
    [3]
    Nell. http://rtw.ml.cmu.edu/rtw/resources.
    [4]
    Wikidata. https://www.wikidata.org.
    [5]
    Yago2. https://www.mpi-inf.mpg.de/departments/databases-and-information-systems/research/yago-naga.
    [6]
    M. Acosta, A. Zaveri, E. Simperl, D. Kontokostas, F. Flöck, and J. Lehmann. Detecting linked data quality issues via crowdsourcing: A dbpedia study. Semantic Web, (Preprint):1--33, 2016.
    [7]
    J. Bragg, D. S. Weld, et al. Crowdsourcing multi-label classification for taxonomy creation. In First AAAI conference on human computation and crowdsourcing, 2013.
    [8]
    M. Brocheler, L. Mihalkova, and L. Getoor. Probabilistic similarity logic. arXiv preprint arXiv.1203.3469, 2012.
    [9]
    G. Casella and R. L. Berger. Statistical inference, volume 2. Duxbury Pacific Grove, CA, 2002.
    [10]
    P. Christen and K. Goiser. Quality and complexity measures for data linkage and deduplication. In Quality measures in data mining, pages 127--151. Springer, 2007.
    [11]
    X. Chu, I. F. Ilyas, S. Krishnan, and J. Wang. Data cleaning: Overview and emerging challenges. In Proceedings of the 2016 International Conference on Management of Data, pages 2201--2206. ACM, 2016.
    [12]
    T. Dalenius and J. L. Hodges Jr. Minimum variance stratification. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 54(285):88--101, 1959.
    [13]
    X. Dong, E. Gabrilovich, G. Heitz, W. Horn, N. Lao, K. Murphy, T. Strohmann, S. Sun, and W. Zhang. Knowledge vault: A web-scale approach to probabilistic knowledge fusion. In Proceedings of the 20th ACM SIGKDD international conference on Knowledge discovery and data mining, pages 601--610. ACM, 2014.
    [14]
    P. S. Efraimidis and P. G. Spirakis. Weighted random sampling with a reservoir. Information Processing Letters, 97(5):181--185, 2006.
    [15]
    M. Fabian, K. Gjergji, W. Gerhard, et al. Yago: A core of semantic knowledge unifying wordnet and wikipedia. In 16th International World Wide Web Conference, WWW, pages 697--706, 2007.
    [16]
    J. Gao, X. Li, Y. E. Xu, B. Sisman, X. L. Dong, and J. Yang. Efficient knowledge graph accuracy evaluation. Technical report, Duke University, 2019. https://users.cs.duke.edu/~jygao/KG_eval_vldb_full.pdf.
    [17]
    D. Gerber, D. Esteves, J. Lehmann, L. Bühmann, R. Usbeck, A.-C. N. Ngomo, and R. Speck. Defactotemporal and multilingual deep fact validation. Web Semantics Science, Services and Agents on the World Wide Web, 35:85--101, 2015.
    [18]
    M. H. Hansen and W. N. Hurwitz. On the theory of sampling from finite populations. The Annals of Mathematical Statistics, 14(4):333--362, 1943.
    [19]
    T. Heath and C. Bizer. Linked data: Evolving the web into a global data space. Synthesis lectures on the semantic web: theory and technology, 1(1):1--136, 2011.
    [20]
    J. M. Hellerstein, P. J. Haas, and H. J. Wang. Online aggregation. In Acm Sigmod Record, volume 26, pages 171--182. ACM, 1997.
    [21]
    N. Lao, T. Mitchell, and W. W. Cohen. Random walk inference and learning in a large scale knowledge base. In Proceedings of the Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing, pages 529--539. Association for Computational Linguistics, 2011.
    [22]
    H. Li, Y. Li, F. Xu, and X. Zhong. Probabilistic error detecting in numerical linked data. In International Conference on Database and Expert Systems Applications, pages 61--75. Springer, 2015.
    [23]
    S. Liu, M. dAquin, and E. Motta. Measuring accuracy of triples in knowledge graphs. In International Conference on Language, Data and Knowledge, pages 343--357. Springer, 2017.
    [24]
    N. G. Marchant and B. I. Rubinstein. In search of an entity resolution oasis: optimal asymptotic sequential importance sampling. PVLDB, 10(11):1322--1333, 2017.
    [25]
    T. Mitchell, W. Cohen, E. Hruschka, P. Talukdar, B. Yang, J. Betteridge, A. Carlson, B. Dalvi, M. Gardner, B. Kisiel, et al. Never-ending learning. Communications of the ACM, 61(5):103--115, 2018.
    [26]
    P. Ojha and P. Talukdar. Kgeval: Accuracy estimation of automatically constructed knowledge graphs. In Proceedings of the 2017 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing, pages 1741--1750, 2017.
    [27]
    S. Ortona, V. V. Meduri, and P. Papotti. Robust discovery of positive and negative rules in knowledge bases. In 2018 IEEE 34th International Conference on Data Engineering (ICDE), pages 1168--1179. IEEE, 2018.
    [28]
    J. S. Vitter. Random sampling with a reservoir. ACM Transactions on Mathematical Software (TOMS), 11(1):37--57, 1985.
    [29]
    J. Wang, S. Krishnan, M. J. Franklin, K. Goldberg, T. Kraska, and T. Milo. A sample-and-clean framework for fast and accurate query processing on dirty data. In Proceedings of the 2014 ACM SIGMOD international conference on Management of data, pages 469--480. ACM, 2014.

    Cited By

    View all
    • (2023)Assessing the Quality of a Knowledge Graph via Link Prediction TasksProceedings of the 2023 7th International Conference on Natural Language Processing and Information Retrieval10.1145/3639233.3639357(124-129)Online publication date: 15-Dec-2023
    • (2023)KGrEaT: A Framework to Evaluate Knowledge Graphs via Downstream TasksProceedings of the 32nd ACM International Conference on Information and Knowledge Management10.1145/3583780.3615241(3938-3942)Online publication date: 21-Oct-2023
    • (2023)Causal knowledge graph construction and evaluation for clinical decision support of diabetic nephropathyJournal of Biomedical Informatics10.1016/j.jbi.2023.104298139:COnline publication date: 1-Mar-2023
    • Show More Cited By

    Recommendations

    Comments

    Information & Contributors

    Information

    Published In

    cover image Proceedings of the VLDB Endowment
    Proceedings of the VLDB Endowment  Volume 12, Issue 11
    July 2019
    543 pages

    Publisher

    VLDB Endowment

    Publication History

    Published: 01 July 2019
    Published in PVLDB Volume 12, Issue 11

    Qualifiers

    • Research-article

    Contributors

    Other Metrics

    Bibliometrics & Citations

    Bibliometrics

    Article Metrics

    • Downloads (Last 12 months)24
    • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)1

    Other Metrics

    Citations

    Cited By

    View all
    • (2023)Assessing the Quality of a Knowledge Graph via Link Prediction TasksProceedings of the 2023 7th International Conference on Natural Language Processing and Information Retrieval10.1145/3639233.3639357(124-129)Online publication date: 15-Dec-2023
    • (2023)KGrEaT: A Framework to Evaluate Knowledge Graphs via Downstream TasksProceedings of the 32nd ACM International Conference on Information and Knowledge Management10.1145/3583780.3615241(3938-3942)Online publication date: 21-Oct-2023
    • (2023)Causal knowledge graph construction and evaluation for clinical decision support of diabetic nephropathyJournal of Biomedical Informatics10.1016/j.jbi.2023.104298139:COnline publication date: 1-Mar-2023
    • (2023)Building Knowledge Graphs in Heliophysics and AstrophysicsNatural Language Processing and Information Systems10.1007/978-3-031-35320-8_15(215-228)Online publication date: 21-Jun-2023
    • (2022)Evaluating Knowledge Graph Accuracy Powered by Optimized Human-machine CollaborationProceedings of the 28th ACM SIGKDD Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining10.1145/3534678.3539233(1368-1378)Online publication date: 14-Aug-2022
    • (2022)Approximate and Interactive Processing of Aggregate Queries on Knowledge Graphs: A DemonstrationProceedings of the 31st ACM International Conference on Information & Knowledge Management10.1145/3511808.3557158(5034-5038)Online publication date: 17-Oct-2022
    • (2021)KnowText: Auto-generated Knowledge Graphs for custom domain applicationsThe 23rd International Conference on Information Integration and Web Intelligence10.1145/3487664.3487803(350-358)Online publication date: 29-Nov-2021
    • (2021)All You Need to Know to Build a Product Knowledge GraphProceedings of the 27th ACM SIGKDD Conference on Knowledge Discovery & Data Mining10.1145/3447548.3470825(4090-4091)Online publication date: 14-Aug-2021
    • (2021)Needle in a HaystackProceedings of the 27th ACM SIGKDD Conference on Knowledge Discovery & Data Mining10.1145/3447548.3467435(1180-1190)Online publication date: 14-Aug-2021

    View Options

    Get Access

    Login options

    Full Access

    View options

    PDF

    View or Download as a PDF file.

    PDF

    eReader

    View online with eReader.

    eReader

    Media

    Figures

    Other

    Tables

    Share

    Share

    Share this Publication link

    Share on social media