Relational knowledge bases (KBs) are commonly used to represent world knowledge in machines. However, while advantageous for their high degree of precision and interpretability, KBs are usually organized according to manually-defined schemas, which limit their expressiveness and require significant human efforts to engineer and maintain. In this review, we take a natural language processing perspective to these limitations, examining how they may be addressed in part by training deep contextual language models (LMs) to internalize and express relational knowledge in more flexible forms. We propose to organize knowledge representation strategies in LMs by the level of KB supervision provided, from no KB supervision at all to entity- and relation-level supervision. Our contributions are threefold: (1) We provide a high-level, extensible taxonomy for knowledge representation in LMs; (2) Within our taxonomy, we highlight notable models, evaluation tasks, and findings, in order to provide an up-to-date review of current knowledge representation capabilities in LMs; and (3) We suggest future research directions that build upon the complementary aspects of LMs and KBs as knowledge representations.
Codifying commonsense knowledge in machines is a longstanding goal of artificial intelligence. Recently, much progress toward this goal has been made with automatic knowledge base (KB) construction techniques. However, such techniques focus primarily on the acquisition of positive (true) KB statements, even though negative (false) statements are often also important for discriminative reasoning over commonsense KBs. As a first step toward the latter, this paper proposes NegatER, a framework that ranks potential negatives in commonsense KBs using a contextual language model (LM). Importantly, as most KBs do not contain negatives, NegatER relies only on the positive knowledge in the LM and does not require ground-truth negative examples. Experiments demonstrate that, compared to multiple contrastive data augmentation approaches, NegatER yields negatives that are more grammatical, coherent, and informative—leading to statistically significant accuracy improvements in a challenging KB completion task and confirming that the positive knowledge in LMs can be “re-purposed” to generate negative knowledge.
Little is known about the trustworthiness of predictions made by knowledge graph embedding (KGE) models. In this paper we take initial steps toward this direction by investigating the calibration of KGE models, or the extent to which they output confidence scores that reflect the expected correctness of predicted knowledge graph triples. We first conduct an evaluation under the standard closed-world assumption (CWA), in which predicted triples not already in the knowledge graph are considered false, and show that existing calibration techniques are effective for KGE under this common but narrow assumption. Next, we introduce the more realistic but challenging open-world assumption (OWA), in which unobserved predictions are not considered true or false until ground-truth labels are obtained. Here, we show that existing calibration techniques are much less effective under the OWA than the CWA, and provide explanations for this discrepancy. Finally, to motivate the utility of calibration for KGE from a practitioner’s perspective, we conduct a unique case study of human-AI collaboration, showing that calibrated predictions can improve human performance in a knowledge graph completion task.
We present CoDEx, a set of knowledge graph completion datasets extracted from Wikidata and Wikipedia that improve upon existing knowledge graph completion benchmarks in scope and level of difficulty. In terms of scope, CoDEx comprises three knowledge graphs varying in size and structure, multilingual descriptions of entities and relations, and tens of thousands of hard negative triples that are plausible but verified to be false. To characterize CoDEx, we contribute thorough empirical analyses and benchmarking experiments. First, we analyze each CoDEx dataset in terms of logical relation patterns. Next, we report baseline link prediction and triple classification results on CoDEx for five extensively tuned embedding models. Finally, we differentiate CoDEx from the popular FB15K-237 knowledge graph completion dataset by showing that CoDEx covers more diverse and interpretable content, and is a more difficult link prediction benchmark. Data, code, and pretrained models are available at https://bit.ly/2EPbrJs.