pith. sign in

arxiv: 2605.16568 · v1 · pith:PLVK33QUnew · submitted 2026-05-15 · 💻 cs.AI

Scalable Uncertainty Reasoning in Knowledge Graphs

Jingcheng Wu This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-20 18:15 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 💻 cs.AI
keywords knowledge graphsuncertainty reasoningprobabilistic circuitsSPARQLgeometric embeddingssemantic webuncertain triples
0
0 comments X

The pith

Specialized algebraic, logical, and geometric mechanisms enable scalable reasoning over uncertainty in knowledge graphs while preserving semantic precision.

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

The paper develops a modular framework to handle uncertainty in knowledge graphs at three distinct levels: imprecise attribute values, probabilistic triple existence, and incomplete schema knowledge. Current Semantic Web standards lack native support for such uncertainty, and simple extensions often become computationally intractable. Three tailored techniques are introduced: probabilistic literals with a corresponding query algebra for continuous attributes, a compilation-based transformation of SPARQL provenance into tractable probabilistic circuits for uncertain triples, and topology-aware geometric embeddings for statistical schema reasoning. The central hypothesis is that these specialized algebraic, logical, and geometric approaches can reconcile semantic precision with computational tractability.

Core claim

The author establishes that a modular framework addressing uncertainty through algebraic query processing for attributes, logical compilation of SPARQL into probabilistic circuits for triples, and geometric embeddings for schema knowledge allows scalable reasoning in knowledge graphs without sacrificing necessary semantic information.

What carries the argument

The modular framework with three specialized techniques: probabilistic literals and query algebra for attributes, compilation to tractable probabilistic circuits for triples, and topology-aware geometric embeddings for schemas.

If this is right

  • Uncertainty at the attribute, triple, and schema levels can be managed separately with methods matched to each level.
  • The compilation of SPARQL provenance into probabilistic circuits supports tractable probabilistic inference over uncertain triples.
  • Topology-aware geometric embeddings enable efficient statistical reasoning over incomplete schema knowledge.
  • Integrating the three techniques yields a scalable system for semantic data integration under real-world uncertainty.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • The framework could extend to other graph-structured data sources that face similar uncertainty challenges in integration tasks.
  • Hybrid combinations of the algebraic, logical, and geometric components might yield further gains in both precision and speed.
  • Large-scale tests on diverse real-world knowledge graphs would provide concrete evidence of practical tractability.

Load-bearing premise

The premise that a compilation-based transformation of SPARQL provenance into tractable probabilistic circuits will preserve necessary information while remaining computationally feasible for uncertain triples.

What would settle it

An experiment on a knowledge graph with many uncertain triples where the circuit compilation either loses key probabilistic dependencies or exceeds feasible computation time would disprove the tractability claim.

read the original abstract

Knowledge Graphs are pivotal for semantic data integration. The real-world data they model is often inherently uncertain. Within knowledge graphs, uncertainty manifests in three distinct levels: imprecise attribute values, probabilistic triple existence, and incomplete schema knowledge. However, current Semantic Web standards lack native support for reasoning over such uncertainty, and na\"ive extensions often incur computational intractability. In this thesis, I aim to develop a modular framework that addresses each level through tailored techniques: (1) defining probabilistic literals and a corresponding query algebra for continuous attributes; (2) a compilation-based framework transforming SPARQL provenance into tractable probabilistic circuits for uncertain triples; and (3) topology-aware geometric embeddings for statistical schema reasoning. The central hypothesis is that specialized reasoning mechanisms, namely algebraic, logical, and geometric approaches, can reconcile semantic precision with computational tractability.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

2 major / 0 minor

Summary. The manuscript is a thesis proposal that outlines plans to develop a modular framework for uncertainty reasoning in Knowledge Graphs. It identifies three levels of uncertainty (imprecise attribute values, probabilistic triple existence, and incomplete schema knowledge) and proposes three techniques: (1) probabilistic literals and a corresponding query algebra for continuous attributes, (2) a compilation-based framework transforming SPARQL provenance into tractable probabilistic circuits for uncertain triples, and (3) topology-aware geometric embeddings for statistical schema reasoning. The central hypothesis is that specialized algebraic, logical, and geometric reasoning mechanisms can reconcile semantic precision with computational tractability.

Significance. If the proposed techniques are developed, formally validated, and empirically tested, the work could advance scalable uncertainty handling in Semantic Web technologies by addressing the lack of native support in current standards. The modular approach combining algebraic, logical, and geometric methods represents a potentially valuable direction for balancing expressiveness and efficiency in knowledge graph reasoning. However, the manuscript contains no derivations, proofs, implementations, or experimental results, so its significance cannot be evaluated on the basis of delivered contributions.

major comments (2)
  1. Abstract: The manuscript presents only aims, a hypothesis, and high-level technique descriptions with no completed derivations, proofs, or preliminary results. This prevents any assessment of whether the proposed techniques actually support the central claim that algebraic, logical, and geometric approaches reconcile precision with tractability.
  2. Abstract (second technique): The premise that a compilation-based transformation of SPARQL provenance into tractable probabilistic circuits will preserve necessary information while remaining computationally feasible for uncertain triples is stated without any details on the compilation process, information-preservation invariants, or complexity bounds, leaving the key feasibility assumption unexamined.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 1 unresolved

We thank the referee for their detailed review of our thesis proposal. The manuscript outlines planned research to develop a modular framework for uncertainty reasoning in knowledge graphs, identifying three uncertainty levels and corresponding specialized techniques. We address the major comments below, noting that this is a proposal for future work rather than a report of completed results.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: Abstract: The manuscript presents only aims, a hypothesis, and high-level technique descriptions with no completed derivations, proofs, or preliminary results. This prevents any assessment of whether the proposed techniques actually support the central claim that algebraic, logical, and geometric approaches reconcile precision with tractability.

    Authors: We agree that the manuscript is a thesis proposal presenting research aims, a central hypothesis, and high-level descriptions of the three techniques without completed derivations, proofs, or preliminary results. This structure is appropriate for a proposal, as the formal validation and empirical testing of the techniques (algebraic query algebra for imprecise attributes, compilation to probabilistic circuits for uncertain triples, and topology-aware embeddings for schema reasoning) are the intended outcomes of the thesis. The proposal can be evaluated on the identification of the uncertainty levels, the rationale for the modular approach, and the potential to address the lack of native support in Semantic Web standards. revision: no

  2. Referee: Abstract (second technique): The premise that a compilation-based transformation of SPARQL provenance into tractable probabilistic circuits will preserve necessary information while remaining computationally feasible for uncertain triples is stated without any details on the compilation process, information-preservation invariants, or complexity bounds, leaving the key feasibility assumption unexamined.

    Authors: The description of the second technique is intentionally high-level in this proposal, outlining a compilation-based framework that transforms SPARQL provenance into tractable probabilistic circuits to handle uncertain triples. Detailed specification of the compilation process, information-preservation invariants, and complexity bounds is planned as core research to be conducted during the thesis. We acknowledge that expanding on these planned steps could strengthen the proposal and are willing to add further high-level elaboration on the approach in a revision. revision: partial

standing simulated objections not resolved
  • The manuscript contains no completed derivations, proofs, implementations, or experimental results, as it is a thesis proposal outlining planned research rather than delivered contributions; this limits evaluation of the techniques' actual effectiveness in reconciling precision with tractability.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity: thesis proposal with no derivations or equations presented

full rationale

This is a forward-looking thesis proposal that states the intent to develop three techniques and hypothesizes that algebraic, logical, and geometric mechanisms can reconcile semantic precision with tractability. No completed derivations, proofs, implementations, equations, or experimental results are presented that would allow identification of any load-bearing step reducing to fitted parameters, self-referential definitions, or self-citation chains. The central hypothesis remains an untested claim rather than an asserted result. The manuscript is self-contained against external benchmarks as a proposal document, with no circularity to flag.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 0 axioms · 0 invented entities

Only the abstract is available; it contains no explicit free parameters, axioms, or invented entities because the work is prospective rather than presenting completed technical content.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5655 in / 1162 out tokens · 86305 ms · 2026-05-20T18:15:22.326068+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Lean theorems connected to this paper

Citations machine-checked in the Pith Canon. Every link opens the source theorem in the public Lean library.

What do these tags mean?
matches
The paper's claim is directly supported by a theorem in the formal canon.
supports
The theorem supports part of the paper's argument, but the paper may add assumptions or extra steps.
extends
The paper goes beyond the formal theorem; the theorem is a base layer rather than the whole result.
uses
The paper appears to rely on the theorem as machinery.
contradicts
The paper's claim conflicts with a theorem or certificate in the canon.
unclear
Pith found a possible connection, but the passage is too broad, indirect, or ambiguous to say the theorem truly supports the claim.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

54 extracted references · 54 canonical work pages · 1 internal anchor

  1. [1]

    Nature genetics25(1), 25–29 (2000).https://doi.org/10.1038/ 75556

    Ashburner,M.,Ball,C.A.,Blake,J.A.,etal.:Geneontology:toolfortheunification of biology. Nature genetics25(1), 25–29 (2000).https://doi.org/10.1038/ 75556

    work page 2000

  2. [2]

    Asma,Z.,Hernández,D.,Galárraga,L.,Flouris,G.,Fundulaki,I.,Hose,K.:NPCS: native provenance computation for SPARQL. In: WWW. pp. 2085–2093. ACM (2024).https://doi.org/10.1145/3589334.3645557

    work page doi:10.1145/3589334.3645557 2085

  3. [3]

    Quantum Inf

    Beaudry, N.J., Renner, R.: An intuitive proof of the data processing inequality. Quantum Inf. Comput.12(5-6), 432–441 (2012).https://doi.org/10.26421 /QIC12.5-6-4

    work page 2012

  4. [4]

    Bednarczyk, B.: Statistical EL is exptime-complete. Inf. Process. Lett.169, 106113 (2021).https://doi.org/10.1016/J.IPL.2021.106113

    work page doi:10.1016/j.ipl.2021.106113 2021

  5. [5]

    Bobillo, F., Straccia, U.: Fuzzy ontology representation using owl 2. Int. J. Approx. Reasoning52(7), 1073–1094 (2011).https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijar.2 011.05.003

    work page doi:10.1016/j.ijar.2 2011

  6. [6]

    In: NIPS

    Bordes, A., Usunier, N., García-Durán, A., Weston, J., Yakhnenko, O.: Translating embeddings for modeling multi-relational data. In: NIPS. pp. 2787–2795 (2013), https://proceedings.neurips.cc/paper/2013/hash/1cecc7a77928c a8133fa24680a88d2f9-Abstract.html

    work page 2013

  7. [7]

    In: JELIA

    Botha, L., Meyer, T., Peñaloza, R.: A bayesian extension of the description logic ALC. In: JELIA. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 11468, pp. 339–354. Springer (2019).https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-19570-0_22

    work page doi:10.1007/978-3-030-19570-0_22 2019

  8. [8]

    den Broeck, G.V., Suciu, D.: Query processing on probabilistic data: A survey. Found. Trends Databases7(3-4), 197–341 (2017).https://doi.org/10.1561/ 1900000052

    work page 2017

  9. [9]

    IEEE Access9, 55537–55554 (2021).https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2021.3070395

    Buchgeher, G., Gabauer, D., Martinez-Gil, J., Ehrlinger, L.: Knowledge graphs in manufacturing and production: A systematic literature review. IEEE Access9, 55537–55554 (2021).https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2021.3070395

    work page doi:10.1109/access.2021.3070395 2021

  10. [10]

    Ceylan, İ.İ., Darwiche, A., den Broeck, G.V.: Open-world probabilistic databases. In: KR. pp. 339–348. AAAI Press (2016),https://aaai.org/papers/35-1 2908-open-world-probabilistic-databases/

    work page 2016

  11. [11]

    Ceylan, İ.İ., Darwiche, A., den Broeck, G.V.: Open-world probabilistic databases: Semantics, algorithms, complexity. Artif. Intell.295, 103474 (2021).https://do i.org/10.1016/J.ARTINT.2021.103474

    work page doi:10.1016/j.artint.2021.103474 2021

  12. [12]

    Choi, Y., Vergari, A., Van den Broeck, G.: Probabilistic circuits: A unifying framework for tractable probabilistic models. Tech. rep., UCLA (2020),http: //starai.cs.ucla.edu/papers/ProbCirc20.pdf

    work page 2020

  13. [13]

    W3C Recommen- dation (Jan 2014),https://www.w3.org/TR/vocab-data-cube/

    Cyganiak, R., Reynolds, D.: The RDF Data Cube Vocabulary. W3C Recommen- dation (Jan 2014),https://www.w3.org/TR/vocab-data-cube/

    work page 2014

  14. [14]

    W3C recommendation, W3C (February 2014),https://www.w3.org/TR/rdf1 1-concepts/

    Cyganiak, R., Wood, D., Lanthaler, M.: RDF 1.1 concepts and abstract syntax. W3C recommendation, W3C (February 2014),https://www.w3.org/TR/rdf1 1-concepts/

    work page 2014

  15. [15]

    VLDB J.16(4), 523–544 (2007).https://doi.org/10.1007/S00778-006-0004-3

    Dalvi, N.N., Suciu, D.: Efficient query evaluation on probabilistic databases. VLDB J.16(4), 523–544 (2007).https://doi.org/10.1007/S00778-006-0004-3

    work page doi:10.1007/s00778-006-0004-3 2007

  16. [16]

    Dalvi, N.N., Suciu, D.: The dichotomy of probabilistic inference for unions of con- junctive queries. J. ACM59(6), 30:1–30:87 (2012).https://doi.org/10.114 5/2395116.2395119

    work page arXiv 2012

  17. [17]

    Darwiche, A., Marquis, P.: A knowledge compilation map. J. Artif. Intell. Res.17, 229–264 (2002).https://doi.org/10.1613/JAIR.989 12 J. Wu

    work page doi:10.1613/jair.989 2002

  18. [18]

    A Knowledge Compilation Map

    Darwiche, A., Marquis, P.: A knowledge compilation map. CoRRabs/1106.1819 (2011),http://arxiv.org/abs/1106.1819

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2011

  19. [19]

    In: EMNLP (Findings)

    Ding,Z.,Wu,J.,Wu,J.,Xia,Y.,Xiong,B.,Tresp,V.:Temporalfactreasoningover hyper-relational knowledge graphs. In: EMNLP (Findings). pp. 355–373. Findings of ACL, Association for Computational Linguistics (2024).https://doi.org/ 10.18653/V1/2024.FINDINGS-EMNLP.20

    work page doi:10.18653/v1/2024.findings-emnlp.20 2024

  20. [20]

    Dong, X., Gabrilovich, E., Heitz, G., Horn, W., Lao, N., Murphy, K., Strohmann, T., Sun, S., Zhang, W.: Knowledge vault: a web-scale approach to probabilistic knowledge fusion. In: KDD. pp. 601–610. ACM (2014).https://doi.org/10 .1145/2623330.2623623

    work page arXiv 2014

  21. [21]

    Geerts, F., Unger, T., Karvounarakis, G., Fundulaki, I., Christophides, V.: Alge- braic structures for capturing the provenance of SPARQL queries. J. ACM63(1), 7:1–7:63 (2016).https://doi.org/10.1145/2810037

    work page doi:10.1145/2810037 2016

  22. [22]

    Gregucci, C., Nayyeri, M., Hernández, D., Staab, S.: Link prediction with attention applied on multiple knowledge graph embedding models. In: WWW. pp. 2600–

    work page

  23. [23]

    ACM (2023).https://doi.org/10.1145/3543507.3583358

    work page doi:10.1145/3543507.3583358 2023

  24. [24]

    W3C recommendation, W3C (March 2013),https://www.w3.org/TR/sparql11-query/

    Harris, S., Seaborne, A.: SPARQL 1.1 query language. W3C recommendation, W3C (March 2013),https://www.w3.org/TR/sparql11-query/

    work page 2013

  25. [26]

    Web Semantics: Science, Services and Agents on the World Wide Web17, 25–32 (2012).https://doi.org/10.1016/j.webs em.2012.05.003

    Henson,C.,Neuhaus,H.,Sheth,A.,etal.:TheSSNontology:W3Csemanticsensor network incubator group report. Web Semantics: Science, Services and Agents on the World Wide Web17, 25–32 (2012).https://doi.org/10.1016/j.webs em.2012.05.003

    work page doi:10.1016/j.webs 2012

  26. [27]

    Hernández, D., Galárraga, L., Hose, K.: Computing how-provenance for SPARQL queries via query rewriting. Proc. VLDB Endow.14(13), 3389–3401 (2021).http s://doi.org/10.14778/3484224.3484235

    work page doi:10.14778/3484224.3484235 2021

  27. [28]

    and Rula, Anisa and Schmelzeisen, Lukas and Sequeda, Juan and Staab, Steffen and Zimmermann, Antoine , year=

    Hogan, A., Blomqvist, E., Cochez, M., d’Amato, C., de Melo, G., Gutierrez, C., Kirrane, S., Gayo, J.E.L., Navigli, R., Neumaier, S., Ngomo, A.N., Polleres, A., Rashid, S.M., Rula, A., Schmelzeisen, L., Sequeda, J.F., Staab, S., Zimmermann, A.: Knowledge graphs. ACM Comput. Surv.54(4), 71:1–71:37 (2022).https: //doi.org/10.1145/3447772

    work page doi:10.1145/3447772 2022

  28. [29]

    In: SIGMOD Conference

    Jampani, R., Xu, F., Wu, M., Perez, L.L., Jermaine, C.M., Haas, P.J.: MCDB: a monte carlo approach to managing uncertain data. In: SIGMOD Conference. pp. 687–700. ACM (2008).https://doi.org/10.1145/1376616.1376686

    work page doi:10.1145/1376616.1376686 2008

  29. [30]

    In: SEMANTiCS

    Keskisärkkä, R., Blomqvist, E., Hartig, O.: Optimizing RDF stream processing for uncertainty management. In: SEMANTiCS. pp. 118–132. Studies on the Semantic Web, IOS Press (2021).https://doi.org/10.3233/SSW210039

    work page doi:10.3233/ssw210039 2021

  30. [31]

    In: EKAW

    Keskisärkkä, R., Blomqvist, E., Lind, L., Hartig, O.: Capturing and querying un- certainty in RDF stream processing. In: EKAW. pp. 37–53. Lecture Notes in Com- puter Science, Springer (2020).https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-612 44-3_3

    work page doi:10.1007/978-3-030-612 2020

  31. [32]

    Elfaham, U

    Lanza, G., Deml, B., Matthiesen, S., Martin, M., Brützel, O., Hörsting, R.: The vision of the circular factory for the perpetual innovative product. at – Automa- tisierungstechnik72(9), 774–788 (2024).https://doi.org/10.1515/auto-2 024-0012

    work page doi:10.1515/auto-2 2024

  32. [33]

    VLDB J.20(2), 249–275 (2011).https://doi.org/10.1007/S007 78-011-0220-3 Scalable Uncertainty Reasoning in Knowledge Graphs 13

    Li, J., Saha, B., Deshpande, A.: A unified approach to ranking in probabilistic databases. VLDB J.20(2), 249–275 (2011).https://doi.org/10.1007/S007 78-011-0220-3 Scalable Uncertainty Reasoning in Knowledge Graphs 13

    work page doi:10.1007/s007 2011

  33. [34]

    Lukasiewicz, T., Straccia, U.: Managing uncertainty and vagueness in description logics for the semantic web. J. Web Semant.6(4), 291–308 (2008).https://do i.org/10.1016/J.WEBSEM.2008.04.001

    work page doi:10.1016/j.websem.2008.04.001 2008

  34. [35]

    Lutz, C., Schröder, L.: Probabilistic description logics for subjective uncertainty. In: KR. AAAI Press (2010),https://aaai.org/papers/45-1243-probabi listic-description-logics-for-subjective-uncertainty/

    work page 2010

  35. [36]

    Journal of the American Sta- tistical Association44(247), 335–341 (1949).https://doi.org/10.2307/22 80232

    Metropolis, N., Ulam, S.: The monte carlo method. Journal of the American Sta- tistical Association44(247), 335–341 (1949).https://doi.org/10.2307/22 80232

    work page doi:10.2307/22 1949

  36. [37]

    In: NIPS

    Nickel, M., Kiela, D.: Poincaré embeddings for learning hierarchical representa- tions. In: NIPS. pp. 6338–6347 (2017),https://proceedings.neurips.cc/p aper/2017/hash/59dfa2df42d9e3d41f5b02bfc32229dd-Abstract.html

    work page 2017

  37. [38]

    Peñaloza, R., Potyka, N.: Towards statistical reasoning in description logics over finite domains. In: SUM. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 10564, pp. 280–

    work page

  38. [39]

    Springer (2017).https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-67582-4_20

    work page doi:10.1007/978-3-319-67582-4_20 2017

  39. [40]

    Springer Texts in Statistics, Springer (2004).https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4757-414 5-2

    Robert, C.P., Casella, G.: Monte Carlo Statistical Methods. Springer Texts in Statistics, Springer (2004).https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4757-414 5-2

    work page doi:10.1007/978-1-4757-414 2004

  40. [41]

    In: AAAI

    Sanner, S., Abbasnejad, E.: Symbolic variable elimination for discrete and con- tinuous graphical models. In: AAAI. pp. 1954–1960. AAAI Press (2012).https: //doi.org/10.1609/AAAI.V26I1.8406

    work page doi:10.1609/aaai.v26i1.8406 1954

  41. [42]

    International Journal of Medical Informatics78, S86–S94 (2009).https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijme dinf.2008.06.004

    Schulz, S., Suntisukwongchote, P., Baader, F., Boeker, M.: SNOMED reaching its adolescence: Ontologists’ and logicians’ health check. International Journal of Medical Informatics78, S86–S94 (2009).https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijme dinf.2008.06.004

    work page doi:10.1016/j.ijme 2009

  42. [43]

    In: COMAD

    Singh, S., Mayfield, C., Mittal, S., Prabhakar, S., Hambrusch, S.E., Shah, R.: The orion uncertain data management system. In: COMAD. pp. 273–276. Computer Society of India / Allied Publishers (2008),http://www.cse.iitb.ac.in/% 7Ecomad/2008/PDFs/orion2-demo.pdf

    work page 2008

  43. [44]

    In: CILC

    Straccia, U.: Foundations of fuzzy logic and semantic web languages. In: CILC. CEUR Workshop Proceedings, vol. 857, p. 1. CEUR-WS.org (2012),https://ce ur-ws.org/Vol-857/paper_i01.pdf

    work page 2012

  44. [45]

    In: PODS

    Suciu, D.: Probabilistic databases for all. In: PODS. pp. 19–31. ACM (2020).ht tps://doi.org/10.1145/3375395.3389129

    work page doi:10.1145/3375395.3389129 2020

  45. [46]

    Bioinform.32(17), 2719–2721 (2016).https: //doi.org/10.1093/BIOINFORMATICS/BTW170

    Swat, M.J., Grenon, P., Wimalaratne, S.M.: Probonto: ontology and knowledge base of probability distributions. Bioinform.32(17), 2719–2721 (2016).https: //doi.org/10.1093/BIOINFORMATICS/BTW170

    work page doi:10.1093/bioinformatics/btw170 2016

  46. [47]

    ACM Trans

    Tao, Y., Xiao, X., Cheng, R.: Range search on multidimensional uncertain data. ACM Trans. Database Syst.32(3), 15 (2007).https://doi.org/10.1145/12 72743.1272745

    work page doi:10.1145/12 2007

  47. [48]

    The Annals of Mathematical Statistics16(2), 117–186 (1945).https://doi.org/10.1214/aoms/1177731 118

    Wald, A.: Sequential tests of statistical hypotheses. The Annals of Mathematical Statistics16(2), 117–186 (1945).https://doi.org/10.1214/aoms/1177731 118

    work page doi:10.1214/aoms/1177731 1945

  48. [49]

    Wang, Y., Li, X., Li, X., Wang, Y.: A survey of queries over uncertain data. Knowl. Inf. Syst.37(3), 485–530 (2013).https://doi.org/10.1007/S10115-013-0 638-6

    work page doi:10.1007/s10115-013-0 2013

  49. [50]

    Faithful Embeddings for

    Xiong, B., Potyka, N., Tran, T.K., Nayyeri, M., Staab, S.: Faithful embeddings for EL++ knowledge bases. In: ISWC 2022. p. 22–38. Springer-Verlag, Berlin, Heidelberg (2022).https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-19433-7_2 14 J. Wu

    work page doi:10.1007/978-3-031-19433-7_2 2022

  50. [51]

    Xiong, B., Zhu, S., Nayyeri, M., Xu, C., Pan, S., Zhou, C., Staab, S.: Ultrahy- perbolic knowledge graph embeddings. In: KDD. pp. 2130–2139. ACM (2022). https://doi.org/10.1145/3534678.3539333

    work page doi:10.1145/3534678.3539333 2022

  51. [52]

    In: DASFAA (1)

    Zhang, Y., Cheng, R., Chen, J.: Evaluating continuous probabilistic queries over imprecise sensor data. In: DASFAA (1). Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 5981, pp. 535–549. Springer (2010).https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-6 42-12026-8_41

    work page doi:10.1007/978-3-6 2010

  52. [53]

    ExpeL: LLM Agents Are Experiential Learners

    Zhu, Y., Potyka, N., Xiong, B., Tran, T., Nayyeri, M., Kharlamov, E., Staab, S.: Approximating probabilistic inference in statistical EL with knowledge graph embeddings. CoRRabs/2407.11821(2024).https://doi.org/10.48550/A RXIV.2407.11821

    work page doi:10.48550/a 2024

  53. [54]

    In: EMNLP

    Zhu, Y., Wu, J., Wang, Y., Zhou, H., Chen, J., Kharlamov, E., Staab, S.: Cer- tainty in uncertainty: Reasoning over uncertain knowledge graphs with statistical guarantees. In: EMNLP. pp. 8730–8752. Association for Computational Linguistics (2025).https://doi.org/10.18653/V1/2025.EMNLP-MAIN.441

    work page doi:10.18653/v1/2025.emnlp-main.441 2025

  54. [55]

    Zimmermann, A., Lopes, N., Polleres, A., Straccia, U.: A general framework for representing, reasoning and querying with annotated semantic web data. J. Web Semant.11, 72–95 (2012).https://doi.org/10.1016/J.WEBSEM.2011.08 .006

    work page doi:10.1016/j.websem.2011.08 2012