Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 5 minor 45 references

FUSE: Measure-Theoretic Compact Fuzzy Set Representation for Taxonomy Expansion

T0 review · 4 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-07 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗

Pith's one-line read A concept can be encoded as a vector of per-cell fuzzy memberships whose weighted intersection score converges to the true fuzzy measure, and this representation, closed under all set operations, outperforms vector and box baselines on…

desk verdict A useful practical model for taxonomy expansion with a measure-theoretic framing that, as stated, doesn't justify the learned score function; the math needs repair but the empirical results are worth a look. read the letter →

arxiv 2506.08409 v1 pith:ZBLPOJ5J submitted 2025-06-10 cs.LG cs.NE

Fred Xu , Song Jiang , Zijie Huang , Xiao Luo , Shichang Zhang , Adrian Chen , Yizhou Sun This is my paper
classification cs.LGcs.NE
keywords fuzzysetembeddingtaxonomyexpansionmeasurerepresentationlearningmeasure-theoreticapproximationconceptboxembeddingssimple
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

The paper claims that a semantic concept can be represented by a fixed-length vector whose entries record the highest fuzzy membership of the concept inside each cell of a finite partition of the concept universe. From that vector, intersection, union, and complement become simple element-wise operations, and the weighted inner product $(U_A \odot U_{\{y\}})^T w$ approximates the fuzzy measure of the concept, the amount of information the fuzzy set carries. If this is right, concepts become closed under the full set algebra while remaining trainable with standard deep-learning tools, which neither plain vectors nor box embeddings offer. The authors prove that the approximation error vanishes as the partition becomes finer, and they report taxonomy-expansion gains of up to 23% over vector and box baselines on two public datasets.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing device is the identification of a fuzzy set's information content with its measure-theoretic volume, $P(A) = \int_U m_A \, d\xi$, and the approximation of that volume by the upper Darboux sum of a simple function. Concretely, the FUSE vector $U_A$ is the vector of per-partition suprema of $m_A$, so $P_\mu(A)$ is exactly the upper Darboux sum of $m_A$ with respect to the partition; Theorem 1 and its Euclidean variant convert this classical fact into a convergence guarantee as the partition refines. This single identity carries the whole argument: it justifies calling the vector an embedding of the fuzzy set, it makes the weighted inner product in Eq. 10 a principled membership score, and it explains why the learned volume weights $w$ can be interpreted as partition measures. The componentwise set operations then come from fuzzy logic t-norms, making the embedding space closed under the algebra.

What would settle it

Take a fuzzy set with a known Lipschitz membership function on a compact Euclidean domain, generate FUSE embeddings at increasing numbers of partitions, and check that $P_\mu(A)$ is always an upper bound on $P(A)$ and that the difference shrinks at $O(1/n)$; any partition refinement that fails to reduce the upper bound would disprove Theorem 1.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

At the center of the paper is the simple fuzzy set: given a fuzzy set $A$ with membership function $m_A$ on a compact universe $U$, fix a finite partition $U = U_1 \cup \cdots \cup U_d$ and define the embedding vector $U_A = [\sup_{x\in U_1} m_A(x), \ldots, \sup_{x\in U_d} m_A(x)]$. The fuzzy measure $P(A) = \int_U m_A \, d\xi$ is then approximated from above by the simple fuzzy measure $P_\mu(A) = \sum_{i=1}^d U_A^{(i)} \xi(U_i)$. Theorem 1 shows that $P_\mu(A) - P(A)$ can be made smaller than any $\epsilon > 0$ by taking the partition fine enough, with Corollary 1 giving a $O(1/n)$ rate for Lipschitz or bounded-variation memberships. Set operations are defined componentwise: intersection as $U_A \odot U_B$, union as $U_A + U_B - U_A \odot U_B$, complement as $1 - U_A$, so every operation returns another vector in the same space. For taxonomy expansion, the paper scores child-parent containment with $\psi(y,A) = (U_A \odot U_{\{y\}})^T w$, where $w$ is a learned weight vector standing for the measure of each partition cell, and augments it with an asymmetry loss based on the ratio $P_\mu(E_p \cap E_c)/P_\mu(E_c)$. On the Environment and Science taxonomy datasets, this beats vector and box baselines, with the largest accuracy gains around 23%.

Load-bearing premise

The framework stands on the premise that the membership values and volume weights the network learns for each concept genuinely describe that concept's fuzzy set, because the convergence theorem applies to a fixed fuzzy set and says nothing about what the trained model discovers from parent-child labels.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Taxonomy expansion reduces to fitting one neural map from word vectors to fuzzy set embeddings, with the parent-child score being the fuzzy measure of an intersection, so the same pipeline can be applied to any is-a relation dataset.
  • Because union, intersection, and complement are all defined inside the embedding space, any query built from these operations, including first-order-logic style combinations, stays representable as a single FUSE vector without needing new geometric objects.
  • The convergence theorem gives a principled way to choose the dimension: more partitions improve the approximation predictably, with an O(1/n) error rate for smooth membership functions.
  • The systematic overestimation of the true measure, since $P_\mu \ge P$, makes wide training margins beneficial, and the paper's ablation confirms that wider margins than usual improve accuracy.
  • The union and complement inference case study shows that trained fuzzy set embeddings can be combined with the defined operations, suggesting the representation already captures some set algebra without explicit supervision.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • Editorial inference: the same representation should transfer to knowledge-graph query answering, where set-theoretic queries are evaluated by the same componentwise vector algebra; a natural next experiment is to train FUSE on first-order-logic queries and measure whether the closed-form operations match the learned embeddings.
  • Editorial inference: the upper-bound property suggests a calibration rule beyond margins, namely that a deployer can subtract a learned bias or temperature per partition size to correct for systematic overestimation, which may improve ranking without changing the architecture.
  • Testable extension: train FUSE with additional supervision that directly compares the operation-computed embedding $U_A + U_B - U_A \odot U_B$ against an independently learned embedding of the union concept; if the distance does not shrink with more partitions, the closedness claim is not being realized by learning.
  • The paper's own complement-inference result suggests that full-universe complement is hard to learn from containment data alone; a plausible extension is relative complement inside a context subspace, which would keep the same vector operations but restrict the universe.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

4 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper introduces FUSE, a d-dimensional embedding of a fuzzy set as the vector of per-cell suprema of its membership function over a finite partition of the universe (Definitions 2–3). It defines a fuzzy measure as the integral of the membership function with respect to a measure ξ, approximates it by the simple fuzzy measure of Eq. (4), and states Theorem 1, which claims convergence of the upper simple approximation to the true fuzzy measure as the partition is refined. For taxonomy expansion, FUSE maps entities to dense membership vectors via a neural network (Eq. 5), scores child–parent membership by a weighted intersection volume (Eq. 10), and adds an asymmetric containment loss (Eqs. 12–15). The paper reports consistent improvements over vector and box baselines on the Environment and Science benchmarks, with ablations over the number of partitions, normalization choices, margins, and the asymmetry weight.

Significance. The volume-based perspective is a useful step toward set representations that are closed under union, intersection, and complement, and the empirical results are strong: FUSE improves ACC, MRR, and Wu&P over BoxTaxo and vector baselines on both datasets, and the partition-size trend in Fig. 4 is directionally consistent with the intended approximation intuition. The ablations are reasonably thorough and include sensitivity to the main hyperparameters. However, the paper’s central theoretical claims are not yet tied to the actual learned model: Theorem 1 is false as stated for arbitrary measurable membership functions, and the score used in training and inference is not shown to be the fuzzy measure of the relevant intersection. If the theoretical claims are repaired or carefully scoped, the empirical contribution would be solid; in its current form the abstract and introduction overstate what has been proven.

major comments (4)
  1. [4.1, Theorem 1; Appendix C] Theorem 1 is false as stated. It asserts convergence for any measurable membership function, but the proof’s Lemma 1 requires continuity. For a counterexample, take U=[0,1] with Lebesgue measure and m_A=1_Q, the indicator of the rationals. Every partition cell contains a rational, so the simple membership function μ_A is identically 1 and P_μ(A)=1, while P(A)=0; the difference never goes below 1/2 regardless of partition fineness. The statement also fails for constant membership functions, for which P_μ(A)=P(A), contradicting the claimed strict inequality 0<P_μ(A)−P(A). The proof of Lemma 1 additionally applies monotone convergence to a non-increasing sequence and appeals to a “compact Banach space of functions” without justification. The theorem can likely be repaired by assuming m_A is Riemann-integrable (or continuous) and by making the inequality non-strict, but as written it does not support the abstract’s “arbitrarily approximate” claim.
  2. [4.2–4.3, Eqs. (5), (9), (10)] The score ψ(y,A) in Eq. (10) is not P_μ(A∩{y}) as defined in Eq. (9) under Definition 2. For a genuine singleton {y}, the simple membership vector U_{ {y} } must be one-hot: it is 1 on the cell containing y and 0 elsewhere, because the supremum of the membership function of {y} over any other cell is 0. Equation (5), however, produces dense vectors U_{ {y} }=σ(f(x_y;θ)) for every entity, including the query y. Thus Eq. (10) is a bilinear score with no demonstrated connection to the fuzzy set of y, and Theorem 1 does not justify it. If “{y}” is instead meant to denote the learned fuzzy concept of entity y, then the notation “A∩{y}” conflates an element with a fuzzy set, and the theorem’s assumptions do not apply. The authors should either constrain the learned mapping so that U_{ {y} } is a genuine simple-function vector for the singleton, or clearly state that the approximation theorem applies only to a fixed fuzzy set and treat the learned model as a separate empirical construction.
  3. [4.3, Eq. (10); Appendix D.3] The learnable weights w are introduced in Eq. (10) as a trainable proxy for the measure ξ(U_i) of Eq. (4), but no constraint connects w to the chosen partition. In the experiments, the un-normalized weights are fitted against the same child–parent labels used for evaluation, and the embeddings are normalized by their Euclidean norm before computing the score. The convergence theorem is stated for a fixed measure ξ and a fixed membership function m_A; it does not cover a score in which both the membership values and the “volume” weights are optimized on the target labels. Without an additional argument that the learned M(A;θ) and w approximate the true m_A and ξ, the central claim that FUSE “compactly approximates the underlying fuzzy set” is unsupported. The empirical results are better presented as those of a parametric scoring model with a fuzzy-set-inspired architecture.
  4. [Corollary 1, Appendix C] The proof of the O(1/n) rate for bounded-variation membership functions contains an unjustified inequality. It bounds sup_{x∈U_i} f(x) − f(x) by V(f)/n uniformly on each U_i; the correct bound is that the integral over U_i is at most the total variation of f on U_i, and that total variation need not be V(f)/n for even partitions when variation concentrates on a small cell. The rate statement may be true for BV functions by other arguments, but the provided proof is not valid as written.
minor comments (5)
  1. [4.3, Eq. (12)] The denominator in Eq. (12) is written as “U_{E_c}”, which is a vector, not a scalar. It should be U_{E_c}^T w or Σ_i U_{E_c,i} w_i to match P_μ(E_c).
  2. [Abstract and Section 2.2] The phrase “first attempt” in the abstract is too strong given the cited work of Boratko et al. (2022) on measure-theoretic set representation learning and the Word2Box line of Dasgupta et al. (2022); please soften or explain the novelty more precisely.
  3. [Figure 4] The caption says “on the science dataset”, but the figure shows both Environment and Science; please correct the caption or the figure.
  4. [4.2, Eq. (5)] Listing LayerNorm as a normalization that maps to [0,1] is inaccurate; LayerNorm does not constrain outputs to [0,1] and is not a membership-function constraint. Please remove it or clarify its role.
  5. [Appendix D.3] Implementation details are incomplete: the paper does not report the learning rate, number of epochs, early-stopping criterion, hidden dimension, the number of negative samples k, or the random seed protocol beyond “averaged over 5 runs”. These should be provided for reproducibility.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 1.0 of 10

No significant circularity: Theorem 1 is a parameter-free measure-theoretic approximation result, and FUSE's empirical claims are tested against held-out taxonomy labels.

full rationale

The paper's central theoretical claim, Theorem 1, states that the simple-function approximation of a fixed fuzzy membership function converges to the fuzzy measure as the partition is refined. This is a standard measure-theoretic result (upper-Darboux-sum/monotone-convergence style) and contains no fitted constants, so it is not circular. The learned score in Eq. 10 replaces the partition measure xi(U_i) with trainable weights w and obtains membership values from a learned neural map M(A; theta) rather than from a known membership function; this means Theorem 1 does not by itself justify the learned score function. However, that is a theory-model gap or correctness risk, not a circular derivation: the score is trained on child-parent labels and evaluated on held-out queries against external benchmarks, so the reported gains are not forced by construction. The paper's self-citations (Chen et al. 2022 for fuzzy-logic background; Jiang et al. 2023 for the taxonomy-expansion setup and asymmetry motivation) are background and not load-bearing; no uniqueness theorem is imported from the authors' prior work. The fuzzy-set operations in Eqs. 6-8 are standard definitions, and the convergence proof invokes external sources (Folland 1999; Wilkins 2016). Overall, no identified step reduces, by definition or by fitted parameter, to its own input.

Assumptions & free parameters 5 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 0 invented entities

FUSE introduces no genuinely new entities; the 'Simple Fuzzy Set' is a standard step-function approximation of a measurable function. The model relies on several domain assumptions about taxonomy semantics and on fitted parameters for the volume weights, partition count, margins, and asymmetry weight.

free parameters (5)
  • global volume weights w = learned, values not reported
    In Eq. 10, w_i approximates the measure ξ(U_i) and is trained end-to-end from taxonomy labels, so the 'measure' is fitted rather than derived from data.
  • number of partitions d = 500 for Science, 350 for Environment
    Chosen by validation and ablation in Fig. 4; it directly controls approximation quality and model capacity.
  • margins γp and γn = base model values not specified; Fig. 6 explores 0.10 to 0.25, text mentions γp=0.6, γn=0.4
    Used in the ranking loss Eq. 11; the paper argues wider margins help because of overestimation, so they are tuned rather than fixed by theory.
  • asymmetry loss weight λ = 0 for base FUSE, 1.0 for FUSE (λ=1.0), 0.5 in FUSE (λ=0.5)
    Controls the strength of the asymmetric child-parent loss in Eq. 15; selected by ablation in Fig. 5.
  • neural network parameters θ = learned, values not reported
    The fuzzy map M(A; θ)=σ(f(x;θ)) in Eq. 5 is trained on taxonomy pairs.
assumptions (5)
  • domain assumption The universe of discourse U is topologically compact and has an open cover.
    Assumption 1 in Appendix B; needed for the convergence theorem.
  • domain assumption U is measurable and is associated with a σ-finite measure space; membership functions are ξ-measurable.
    Assumption 2 in Appendix B; required for the fuzzy measure definition and Theorem 1.
  • ad hoc to paper Membership functions are sufficiently regular, such as continuous or Lipschitz, for pointwise convergence of upper simple functions.
    Theorem 1 states only measurability, but the proof requires continuity or similar regularity; this assumption is implicit but unstated.
  • domain assumption Taxonomy membership probability can be scored as the fuzzy measure of the intersection of the parent and child fuzzy sets.
    Central modeling choice in Eq. 10 and Eq. 12; not derived from first principles.
  • domain assumption Product t-norm and probabilistic t-conorm are appropriate fuzzy set operations for concept intersection and union.
    Used in Eq. 6 and Eq. 7; other fuzzy logic systems such as Gödel logic are mentioned but not used.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of FUSE: Measure-Theoretic Compact Fuzzy Set Representation for Taxonomy Expansion." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/ZBLPOJ5J

@misc{pith2026250608409,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: FUSE: Measure-Theoretic Compact Fuzzy Set Representation for Taxonomy Expansion},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/ZBLPOJ5J}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2506.08409}
}
read the original abstract

Taxonomy Expansion, which models complex concepts and their relations, can be formulated as a set representation learning task. The generalization of set, fuzzy set, incorporates uncertainty and measures the information within a semantic concept, making it suitable for concept modeling. Existing works usually model sets as vectors or geometric objects such as boxes, which are not closed under set operations. In this work, we propose a sound and efficient formulation of set representation learning based on its volume approximation as a fuzzy set. The resulting embedding framework, Fuzzy Set Embedding (FUSE), satisfies all set operations and compactly approximates the underlying fuzzy set, hence preserving information while being efficient to learn, relying on minimum neural architecture. We empirically demonstrate the power of FUSE on the task of taxonomy expansion, where FUSE achieves remarkable improvements up to 23% compared with existing baselines. Our work marks the first attempt to understand and efficiently compute the embeddings of fuzzy sets.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2506.08409 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Illustration of set operations under fuzzy set membership function for two sets [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. On the left plot (a), we illustrate when the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. The overview of FUSE used to model concepts in taxonomy. First the entities are converted into vectors [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (3 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Trend of model performance with varying number of partitions on the science dataset. 5.1 Does FUSE Benefit from More Partitions? Here we examine the impact of choice of number of partitions, since according to theorem 1, as d increases, we should expect better approxim…
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Model performance with different strength of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_5.png]
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Model performance with different choice of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_6.png]

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

45 extracted references · 26 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Jimmy Lei Ba, Jamie Ryan Kiros, and Geoffrey E. Hinton. 2016. https://arxiv.org/abs/1607.06450 Layer normalization . Preprint, arXiv:1607.06450

    arXiv 2016

  2. [2]

    Haw-Shiuan Chang, ZiYun Wang, Luke Vilnis, and Andrew McCallum. 2018. https://arxiv.org/abs/1710.00880 Distributional inclusion vector embedding for unsupervised hypernymy detection . Preprint, arXiv:1710.00880

    work page Pith review arXiv 2018

  3. [3]

    Xuelu Chen, Michael Boratko, Muhao Chen, Shib Sankar Dasgupta, Xiang Lorraine Li, and Andrew McCallum. 2021. Probabilistic box embeddings for uncertain knowledge graph reasoning. In Proceedings of the 19th Annual Conference of the North American Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics (NAACL)

    work page 2021

  4. [4]

    Xuelu Chen, Ziniu Hu, and Yizhou Sun. 2022. https://arxiv.org/abs/2108.02390 Fuzzy logic based logical query answering on knowledge graphs . Preprint, arXiv:2108.02390

    work page Pith review arXiv 2022

  5. [5]

    Michael Boratko Dhruvesh Patel Shib Sankar Dasgupta and Andrew McCallum. 2022. Measure-theoretic set representation learning

    work page 2022

  6. [6]

    Shib Dasgupta, Michael Boratko, Siddhartha Mishra, Shriya Atmakuri, Dhruvesh Patel, Xiang Li, and Andrew McCallum. 2022 a . https://doi.org/10.18653/v1/2022.acl-long.161 W ord2 B ox: Capturing set-theoretic semantics of words using box embeddings . In Proceedings of the 60th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (Volume 1: Long P...

    work page doi:10.18653/v1/2022.acl-long.161 2022

  7. [7]

    Shib Sankar Dasgupta, Michael Boratko, Siddhartha Mishra, Shriya Atmakuri, Dhruvesh Patel, Xiang Lorraine Li, and Andrew McCallum. 2022 b . https://arxiv.org/abs/2106.14361 Word2box: Capturing set-theoretic semantics of words using box embeddings . Preprint, arXiv:2106.14361

    work page Pith review arXiv 2022

  8. [8]

    Jacob Devlin, Ming-Wei Chang, Kenton Lee, and Kristina Toutanova. 2019. https://arxiv.org/abs/1810.04805 Bert: Pre-training of deep bidirectional transformers for language understanding . Preprint, arXiv:1810.04805

    arXiv 2019

Show all 45 references
  1. [9]

    Gerald Folland. 1999. Real analysis : modern techniques and their applications, volume 1. Wiley

    1999

  2. [10]

    Hamilton, Payal Bajaj, Marinka Zitnik, Dan Jurafsky, and Jure Leskovec

    William L. Hamilton, Payal Bajaj, Marinka Zitnik, Dan Jurafsky, and Jure Leskovec. 2019. https://arxiv.org/abs/1806.01445 Embedding logical queries on knowledge graphs . Preprint, arXiv:1806.01445

    2019 arXiv

  3. [11]

    Zijie Huang, Daheng Wang, Binxuan Huang, Chenwei Zhang, Jingbo Shang, Yan Liang, Zhengyang Wang, Xian Li, Christos Faloutsos, Yizhou Sun, and Wei Wang. 2023. C oncept2 B ox: Joint geometric embeddings for learning two-view knowledge graphs. In Findings of the Association for C...

    2023

  4. [12]

    Song Jiang, Qiyue Yao, Qifan Wang, and Yizhou Sun. 2023. https://doi.org/10.1145/3543507.3583310 A single vector is not enough: Taxonomy expansion via box embeddings . In Proceedings of the ACM Web Conference 2023, WWW '23, page 2467–2476, New York, NY, USA. Association for Co...

    2023

  5. [13]

    Wei Ju, Zheng Fang, Yiyang Gu, Zequn Liu, Qingqing Long, Ziyue Qiao, Yifang Qin, Jianhao Shen, Fang Sun, Zhiping Xiao, et al. 2023. A comprehensive survey on deep graph representation learning. arXiv preprint arXiv:2304.05055

    2023 arXiv

  6. [14]

    Klement, R

    E.P. Klement, R. Mesiar, and E. Pap. 2013. https://books.google.com/books?id=HXzvCAAAQBAJ Triangular Norms . Trends in Logic. Springer Netherlands

    2013

  7. [15]

    Chen Liang, Wenguan Wang, Jiaxu Miao, and Yi Yang. 2023. Logic-induced diagnostic reasoning for semi-supervised semantic segmentation. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF International Conference on Computer Vision, pages 16197--16208

    2023

  8. [16]

    Junyu Lu, Bo Xu, Xiaokun Zhang, Changrong Min, Liang Yang, and Hongfei Lin. 2023. Facilitating fine-grained detection of chinese toxic language: Hierarchical taxonomy, resources, and benchmarks. arXiv preprint arXiv:2305.04446

    2023 arXiv

  9. [17]

    Tomas Mikolov, Kai Chen, Greg Corrado, and Jeffrey Dean. 2013. https://arxiv.org/abs/1301.3781 Efficient estimation of word representations in vector space . Preprint, arXiv:1301.3781

    2013 arXiv

  10. [18]

    Steven Nahmias. 1978. https://doi.org/10.1016/0165-0114(78)90011-8 Fuzzy variables . Fuzzy Sets and Systems, 1(2):97--110

    1978 doi

  11. [19]

    Alexander Panchenko, Stefano Faralli, Eugen Ruppert, Steffen Remus, Hubert Naets, C \'e drick Fairon, Simone Paolo Ponzetto, and Chris Biemann. 2016. https://doi.org/10.18653/v1/S16-1206 TAXI at S em E val-2016 task 13: a taxonomy induction method based on lexico-syntactic pat...

    2016 doi

  12. [20]

    Jeffrey Pennington, Richard Socher, and Christopher D Manning. 2014. Glove: Global vectors for word representation. In EMNLP, volume 14, pages 1532--1543

    2014

  13. [21]

    Alec Radford, Karthik Narasimhan, Tim Salimans, and Ilya Sutskever. 2018. Improving language understanding by generative pre-training

    2018

  14. [22]

    Hongyu Ren, Weihua Hu, and Jure Leskovec. 2020. https://arxiv.org/abs/2002.05969 Query2box: Reasoning over knowledge graphs in vector space using box embeddings . Preprint, arXiv:2002.05969

    2020 arXiv

  15. [23]

    Hongyu Ren and Jure Leskovec. 2020. https://arxiv.org/abs/2010.11465 Beta embeddings for multi-hop logical reasoning in knowledge graphs . Preprint, arXiv:2010.11465

    2020 arXiv

  16. [24]

    Ryan A Rossi, Nesreen K Ahmed, Eunyee Koh, Sungchul Kim, Anup Rao, and Yasin Abbasi-Yadkori. 2020. A structural graph representation learning framework. In Proceedings of the 13th international conference on web search and data mining, pages 483--491

    2020

  17. [25]

    Jiaming Shen, Zhihong Shen, Chenyan Xiong, Chi Wang, Kuansan Wang, and Jiawei Han. 2020. https://doi.org/10.1145/3366423.3380132 TaxoExpan : Self-supervised taxonomy expansion with position-enhanced graph neural network . In Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020. ACM

    2020

  18. [26]

    Vered Shwartz, Yoav Goldberg, and Ido Dagan. 2016. https://doi.org/10.18653/v1/P16-1226 Improving hypernymy detection with an integrated path-based and distributional method . In Proceedings of the 54th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (Volume 1:...

    2016 doi

  19. [27]

    Rion Snow, Daniel Jurafsky, and Andrew Ng. 2004. https://proceedings.neurips.cc/paper_files/paper/2004/file/358aee4cc897452c00244351e4d91f69-Paper.pdf Learning syntactic patterns for automatic hypernym discovery . In Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, volume 17...

    2004

  20. [28]

    Emile van Krieken, Erman Acar, and Frank van Harmelen. 2022. Analyzing differentiable fuzzy logic operators. Artificial Intelligence, 302:103602

    2022

  21. [29]

    Gomez, Lukasz Kaiser, and Illia Polosukhin

    Ashish Vaswani, Noam Shazeer, Niki Parmar, Jakob Uszkoreit, Llion Jones, Aidan N. Gomez, Lukasz Kaiser, and Illia Polosukhin. 2023. https://arxiv.org/abs/1706.03762 Attention is all you need . Preprint, arXiv:1706.03762

    2023 arXiv

  22. [30]

    Benedikt Wagner and Artur S d'Avila Garcez. 2022. Neural-symbolic reasoning under open-world and closed-world assumptions. In CEUR Workshop Proceedings, volume 3121. CEUR

    2022

  23. [31]

    Bo Wang, Tao Shen, Guodong Long, Tianyi Zhou, Ying Wang, and Yi Chang. 2021. Structure-augmented text representation learning for efficient knowledge graph completion. In Proceedings of the Web Conference 2021, pages 1737--1748

    2021

  24. [32]

    David R. Wilkins. 2016. http://www.maths.tcd.ie/ dwilkins/Courses/MA2321/MA2321_Mich2016_CourseNotes The multidimensional riemann-darboux integral

    2016

  25. [33]

    Zhibiao Wu and Martha Palmer. 1994. https://doi.org/10.3115/981732.981751 Verb semantics and lexical selection . In 32nd Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics, pages 133--138, Las Cruces, New Mexico, USA. Association for Computational Linguistics

    1994

  26. [34]

    Hongyuan Xu, Ciyi Liu, Yuhang Niu, Yunong Chen, Xiangrui Cai, Yanlong Wen, and Xiaojie Yuan. 2023. Tacoprompt: A collaborative multi-task prompt learning method for self-supervised taxonomy completion. In Proceedings of the 2023 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Langu...

    2023

  27. [35]

    Zezhong Xu, Wen Zhang, Peng Ye, Hui Chen, and Huajun Chen. 2022. Neural-symbolic entangled framework for complex query answering. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, 35:1806--1819

    2022

  28. [36]

    Dongran Yu, Bo Yang, Qianhao Wei, Anchen Li, and Shirui Pan. 2022. A probabilistic graphical model based on neural-symbolic reasoning for visual relationship detection. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, pages 10609--10618

    2022

  29. [37]

    Xinchen Yu, Ashley Zhao, Eduardo Blanco, and Lingzi Hong. 2023. A fine-grained taxonomy of replies to hate speech. In Proceedings of the 2023 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing, pages 7275--7289

    2023

  30. [38]

    Yue Yu, Yinghao Li, Jiaming Shen, Hao Feng, Jimeng Sun, and Chao Zhang. 2020. https://doi.org/10.1145/3394486.3403145 STEAM : Self-supervised taxonomy expansion with mini-paths . In Proceedings of the 26th ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Min...

    2020

  31. [39]

    L.A Zadeh. 1978. https://doi.org/10.1016/0165-0114(78)90029-5 Fuzzy sets as a basis for a theory of possibility . Fuzzy Sets and Systems, 1(1):3--28

    1978 doi

  32. [40]

    L.A. Zadeh. 1999. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0165-0114(99)80004-9 Fuzzy sets as a basis for a theory of possibility . Fuzzy Sets and Systems, 100:9--34

    1999 doi

  33. [41]

    Rui Zhang, Bayu Distiawan Trisedya, Miao Li, Yong Jiang, and Jianzhong Qi. 2022. A benchmark and comprehensive survey on knowledge graph entity alignment via representation learning. The VLDB Journal, 31(5):1143--1168

    2022

  34. [42]

    Qihuang Zhong, Liang Ding, Juhua Liu, Bo Du, Hua Jin, and Dacheng Tao. 2023. Knowledge graph augmented network towards multiview representation learning for aspect-based sentiment analysis. IEEE Transactions on Knowledge and Data Engineering

    2023

  35. [43]

    Zhaocheng Zhu, Mikhail Galkin, Zuobai Zhang, and Jian Tang. 2022. https://arxiv.org/abs/2205.10128 Neural-symbolic models for logical queries on knowledge graphs . Preprint, arXiv:2205.10128

    2022 arXiv

  36. [44]

    online" 'onlinestring :=

    ENTRY address archivePrefix author booktitle chapter edition editor eid eprint eprinttype howpublished institution journal key month note number organization pages publisher school series title type volume year doi pubmed url lastchecked label extra.label sort.label short.list...

  37. [45]

    write newline

    " write newline "" before.all 'output.state := FUNCTION n.dashify 't := "" t empty not t #1 #1 substring "-" = t #1 #2 substring "--" = not "--" * t #2 global.max substring 't := t #1 #1 substring "-" = "-" * t #2 global.max substring 't := while if t #1 #1 substring * t #2 gl...

Pith tools

Reviewed August 7, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.