Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 cited by

Increasing the LLM Accuracy for Question Answering: Ontologies to the Rescue!

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

arxiv 2405.11706 v1 pith:BL25VG7K submitted 2024-05-20 cs.AI cs.DBcs.IRcs.LO

classification cs.AIcs.DBcs.IRcs.LO
keywords accuracyknowledgeerrorgraphontologyqueryquestionsparql
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal
0 comments
read the original abstract

There is increasing evidence that question-answering (QA) systems with Large Language Models (LLMs), which employ a knowledge graph/semantic representation of an enterprise SQL database (i.e. Text-to-SPARQL), achieve higher accuracy compared to systems that answer questions directly on SQL databases (i.e. Text-to-SQL). Our previous benchmark research showed that by using a knowledge graph, the accuracy improved from 16% to 54%. The question remains: how can we further improve the accuracy and reduce the error rate? Building on the observations of our previous research where the inaccurate LLM-generated SPARQL queries followed incorrect paths, we present an approach that consists of 1) Ontology-based Query Check (OBQC): detects errors by leveraging the ontology of the knowledge graph to check if the LLM-generated SPARQL query matches the semantic of ontology and 2) LLM Repair: use the error explanations with an LLM to repair the SPARQL query. Using the chat with the data benchmark, our primary finding is that our approach increases the overall accuracy to 72% including an additional 8% of "I don't know" unknown results. Thus, the overall error rate is 20%. These results provide further evidence that investing knowledge graphs, namely the ontology, provides higher accuracy for LLM powered question answering systems.

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 3 Pith papers

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. SAGA: Schema-Aware Grounding for Agentic Text-to-SPARQL Generation

    cs.AI 2026-07 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    Schema-aware property filtering during interactive KBQA grounding improves answer F1 on nine benchmarks and reduces empty results.

  2. AraTable: Benchmarking LLMs' Reasoning and Understanding of Arabic Tabular Data

    cs.CL 2025-07 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    AraTable is the first Arabic tabular QA benchmark; its experiments show LLMs are much weaker at reasoning over Arabic tables than at direct lookup.

  3. HuggingGraph: Understanding the Supply Chain of LLM Ecosystem

    cs.CL 2025-07 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

    A directed heterogeneous graph of 402,654 Hugging Face models and datasets is constructed and analyzed to reveal supply-chain dependencies and structural patterns such as a connected core and heavy-tailed reuse.

Pith tools