REVIEW 1 cited by
Entity Aware Negative Sampling with Auxiliary Loss of False Negative Prediction for Knowledge Graph Embedding
Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.
This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.
SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event
T0 review · schema-true
One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.
pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp
read the original abstract
Knowledge graph (KG) embedding is widely used in many downstream applications using KGs. Generally, since KGs contain only ground truth triples, it is necessary to construct arbitrary negative samples for representation learning of KGs. Recently, various methods for sampling high-quality negatives have been studied because the quality of negative triples has great effect on KG embedding. In this paper, we propose a novel method called Entity Aware Negative Sampling (EANS), which is able to sample negative entities resemble to positive one by adopting Gaussian distribution to the aligned entity index space. Additionally, we introduce auxiliary loss for false negative prediction that can alleviate the impact of the sampled false negative triples. The proposed method can generate high-quality negative samples regardless of negative sample size and effectively mitigate the influence of false negative samples. The experimental results on standard benchmarks show that our EANS outperforms existing the state-of-the-art methods of negative sampling on several knowledge graph embedding models. Moreover, the proposed method achieves competitive performance even when the number of negative samples is limited to only one.
Forward citations
Cited by 1 Pith paper
-
Enhancing PyKEEN with Multiple Negative Sampling Solutions for Knowledge Graph Embedding Models
A PyKEEN extension integrates seven known negative sampling strategies; experiments on FB15K and WN18 show pool sizes shrink sharply and random fallback often dominates at high sample counts.
Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.