Knowledge Graphs for Enhancing Large Language Models in Entity Disambiguation

Anna Queralt; Besim Bilalli; Gerard Pons

REVIEW 2 major objections 5 minor 44 references

Knowledge Graphs for Enhancing Large Language Models in Entity Disambiguation

T0 review · 2 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-16 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read Knowledge-graph class hierarchies can guide a zero-shot LLM to disambiguate entities better than direct prompting or description-only enrichment.

desk verdict The LCA-based class pruning idea is genuinely new and the baseline gains are real, but the headline comparison with ChatEL is invalid because each method is scored on a different inKB subset with a different Gold ceiling. read the letter →

arxiv 2505.02737 v2 pith:BXZTMODD submitted 2025-05-05 cs.LG cs.AIcs.DB

Gerard Pons , Besim Bilalli , Anna Queralt This is my paper · ORCID

classification cs.LGcs.AIcs.DB

keywords entitydisambiguationlinkingknowledgegraphslargelanguagemodelszero-shotlearningretrievalaugmentedgenerationclasstaxonomyprompt-basedpruning

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

This paper tries to show that a large language model can disambiguate entity mentions more accurately when it is guided by the class hierarchy of a knowledge graph instead of being asked to choose directly from a candidate list. The proposed method builds a directed-acyclic graph of candidate entities and their classes, then prompts the LLM to prune classes step by step, retrieving entity descriptions only when the final choice is at entity level. Evaluated on ten entity-disambiguation datasets with GPT-3.5, the method beats the same LLM prompted without this structure and beats a description-only RAG baseline, even though that baseline used a stronger model, while matching a heavily trained task-specific model's average with a far smaller training burden. The broader point is that structured external knowledge, not just bigger models, can carry part of the reasoning load in zero-shot knowledge-intensive NLP.

What carries the argument

The central mechanism is the candidate-entity DAG: a directed-acyclic graph whose root is the KG's top class (Thing), whose leaves are the candidate entities, and whose internal nodes are the classes connecting them. At each step the algorithm takes the lowest common ancestor (the deepest node that is an ancestor of all remaining candidates) and inspects whether its direct successors are all classes, all entities, or a mix; the LLM is prompted to pick among those successors, the unchosen subtrees are pruned, and the process repeats until one candidate remains. The taxonomy-guided pruning is what lets the LLM disambiguate gradually (average about 2.2 iterations), and the description retrieval is a targeted retrieval-augmented step used only at entity-level decisions.

What would settle it

On the ten datasets, restrict to mentions whose gold entity appears in both YAGO and DBpedia and whose candidate set contains it, then recompute F1 for the non-enhanced baseline, the description-only baseline, and the proposed method on that identical subset; if class-guided pruning does not outperform description-only prompting there, the central claim fails.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper's central claim is that a zero-shot LLM can solve entity disambiguation better when the candidate space is pruned stepwise by the class taxonomy of a knowledge graph than when the LLM is asked to pick directly or is given only entity descriptions. Given a set of candidate entities, the method builds a DAG from the graph's class hierarchy, finds the lowest common ancestor of the remaining candidates, and prompts the LLM to choose among the classes (or entities) immediately below it; the unchosen branches are deleted and the loop repeats until one entity remains. Entity descriptions from a knowledge base are retrieved and appended to the prompt only when the choice is among entities directly, so the LLM never has to resolve mentions without factual grounding. On ten datasets, this procedure reports weighted-average %Gold F1 above the non-enhanced baseline and above the description-only baseline, using a less powerful LLM than that baseline, and it outperforms the trained task-specific model on the out-of-domain KORE dataset by a large margin; with the more granular YAGO taxonomy it beats the shallow DBpedia taxonomy in 7 of 10 datasets. The authors therefore conclude that structured class hierarchies carry part of the disambiguation reasoning that otherwise has to come from the model or from retrieved text.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing assumption is that scoring each method on its own subset of mentions, only those whose correct entity exists in that method's knowledge graph, still allows fair comparison, even though the maximum achievable F1 for those subsets differs sharply from method to method.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

If the central claim holds, an LLM can be made more reliable at linking mentions to entities without any training or fine-tuning, by replacing direct prediction with iterative pruning over a knowledge graph's class hierarchy.
A more fine-grained class taxonomy in the knowledge graph yields better disambiguation on most datasets, so KG quality, not just LLM size, becomes a lever for entity disambiguation performance.
Because the method does not require task-specific training, it can be applied to new domains out of the box; the KORE dataset is the paper's evidence that an off-the-shelf version beats a trained news-domain model there.
The pruning loop stays cheap: graph manipulation is two orders of magnitude faster than the LLM calls and the average number of iterations is about 2.2 for both KGs, so the added structure does not create a bottleneck.

Reading between the lines

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

A testable next step would be to use the same pruning loop with an ontology tailored to the mention domain (for example, occupation classes for the OKE datasets), which the paper's error analysis suggests could recover the YAGO-vs-DBpedia losses.
The paper's comparability caveat implies that a common-subset evaluation, restricting all methods to mentions whose gold entity exists in every KG and candidate set, could change the relative rankings; this is not tested in the paper.
The approach could extend beyond entity disambiguation to other constrained-choice tasks where a knowledge graph supplies a class taxonomy, such as fine-grained entity typing or slot filling.
Since descriptions enter only at the final entity-level step, a natural ablation would be to test whether retrieving descriptions at class-level decisions also helps, which the paper does not report.

Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Desk Editor's Note

read the letter

Colleague,

Two things you should know about arXiv:2505.02737. First, the core mechanism—iterative LCA-based pruning over the KG class taxonomy with None/Other fallback prompts—is genuinely new, clearly explained, and the code is released. Second, the paper's central comparative claim, that it outperforms ChatEL, is not supported by the reported numbers. The stress-test note is correct: Table 2's % Gold column compares scores normalized by different Gold F1 ceilings. On KORE, OurYAGO's Gold F1 is 79.6, ChatEL's is 88.0, and ChatEL's raw F1 is higher on all ten datasets. The 1.8-point weighted-average advantage in % Gold is an artifact of lower ceilings, not better disambiguation. The paper acknowledges the differing Gold F1 values, but the assertion that percentage of Gold makes the proposals comparable does not hold up.

What is actually good: the pruning algorithm is a real contribution. Using the class DAG to ask the LLM to select among sibling classes before descending to entity candidates is elegant, and the fallback cases (mixed class/entity successors, the None option, the final verification prompt) are thoughtful engineering. The plain-prompt baseline comparison is clean and shows a consistent improvement across all ten datasets—that is a legitimate result on its own. The error analysis is honest and useful, and the YAGO-vs-DBpedia expressivity comparison is a reasonable secondary study.

Soft spots beyond the ChatEL issue: the comparison also entangles the LLM backbone (GPT-3.5 vs GPT-4), so even on identical subsets the method effect would be confounded. No confidence intervals are reported; temperature 0 reduces but does not remove variance, and a single run is still a single run. The baseline's Gold F1 also differs from ChatEL's on many datasets, so the baseline gains are real only within the same-method comparison.

Who this is for: anyone working on KG- or LLM-based entity linking, especially zero-shot prompting approaches. The evaluation needs a redo on shared mention subsets with a common Gold ceiling, or at least raw F1 on identical inKB subsets, before the headline claim stands.

I would send this to peer review—there is a real idea here—but I would not accept the comparative claim as written.

Referee Report

2 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper proposes a zero-shot entity disambiguation method that enhances LLM prompts using knowledge graph class taxonomies. Given a candidate set, the method builds a DAG of the candidate entities and their class hierarchy, then iteratively prompts the LLM to select among the direct successors of the lowest common ancestor, pruning candidates until one remains. Entity descriptions are added when the decision is at the entity level. The method is evaluated on ten ED datasets with GPT-3.5, using YAGO and DBpedia, and compared against a non-enhanced LLM baseline, the description-only ChatEL baseline, and the task-specific ReFinED model.

Significance. If the claims hold, the paper would demonstrate a practical way to improve zero-shot LLM entity disambiguation without any training, using a novel KG-guide pruning strategy. The paper is clearly written and provides reproducible materials: the code, prompts, and datasets are available. It also contributes a useful comparison of KG expressivity (YAGO vs DBpedia) and a sensible error analysis. However, the central comparative claim against the description-only baseline (ChatEL) is not supported by the current evaluation, which relies on a questionable normalization. The contribution of the pruning method itself is plausible, but the evidence for 'outperforms description-only enhanced LLMs' needs a fundamental fix.

major comments (2)

[§4.1 Evaluation Metric, Table 2, §4.2 comparison to ChatEL] The claim that the proposed method outperforms ChatEL (Section 4.2: 'better results are obtained by our approach in 6 out of 10 datasets') rests on the '% Gold F1' column. This normalization does not make the comparison valid when the Gold F1 denominators differ, as they do across rows: for KORE, OurYAGO has Gold F1 = 79.6 and ChatEL has Gold F1 = 88.0, yet the F1 scores are 71.8 and 78.7 respectively. The raw F1 favors ChatEL on all ten datasets, and the higher % Gold for OurYAGO (90.1 vs 89.4) is an artifact of a lower denominator. The text asserts that '% Gold' 'makes the proposals comparable', but this is unjustified; a method evaluated on a smaller or easier inKB subset can score a higher percentage of a lower ceiling. To support the central claim, all methods must be scored on an identical mention subset with a shared Gold denominator; otherwise the weighted-average advantage of 1.8 points is not meaningful.
[§4.2, paragraph on task-specific model] The claim that the proposed method has 'a higher degree of adaptability to different domains than the task-specific model' is not supported by the evidence. ReFinED achieves better or equal % Gold on 6 of 10 datasets and a higher weighted average (82.6 vs 81.1 for OurYAGO). The only dataset where OurYAGO wins by a large margin is KORE, a small hand-crafted dataset with 144 mentions. A single out-of-domain dataset is insufficient to establish a general adaptability advantage, and no quantitative definition of adaptability is provided. This claim should be tempered or supported by additional cross-domain experiments.

minor comments (5)

[Supplemental Material Statement] The linked GitHub repository contains 'doubleBlindReview2048' in the URL, which is an artifact of the review process and should be replaced with a public, non-anonymized repository in the final version.
[Disclaimer] The paper states that the Version of Record is published in ISWC 2024; if this preprint is intended as the submitted version, the abstract and claims should align with the published camera-ready, and the disclaimer should be removed or updated.
[§4.1 Evaluation Metric] The definition of Gold F1 (Section 4.1: 'the maximum inKB micro-F1 score that could be obtained, as the candidate sets do not always contain the ground truth entity') is incomplete: Gold F1 also depends on KG coverage, not only candidate-set coverage, since it is computed on the inKB subset. The sentence should clarify both factors.
[§4.2, first paragraph] The text says 'This demonstrates that even with the vast amounts of data... the addition of external knowledge on the prompts and the guidance during the disambiguation can be helpful', but the claim that the method outperforms the baseline on all datasets is true only for % Gold, not for raw F1 (e.g., ACE04: Baseline F1 89.1 vs OurYAGO F1 88.7). This should be stated precisely to avoid overclaiming.
[§4.2, comparison with ChatEL] The comparison with ChatEL also involves a model-size confound: ChatEL uses GPT-4 while the proposed method uses GPT-3.5. The authors acknowledge this, but the headline claim of 'outperforms description-only enhanced LLMs' should be interpreted with this confound explicitly in mind, especially because the main evidence is the invalid % Gold normalization.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the method's predictions come from an external LLM and external KG, and no fitted parameter is renamed as a prediction.

full rationale

The paper's central claim is that KG-guided class-taxonomy pruning plus entity descriptions improves zero-shot LLM entity disambiguation. Every input to the method is external: candidate sets are borrowed from ChatEL [12], the class hierarchy comes from YAGO/DBpedia, entity descriptions come from Wikipedia, and the decisions are made by the external GPT-3.5 model. The algorithm (Algorithm 1) has no trainable parameters and never sees the gold labels during inference; its outputs are LLM responses to prompts, not quantities derived from the evaluation targets. There is no equation in which the predicted entity is, by construction, an input to itself, and no fitted parameter is later renamed as a prediction. The one evaluation-related construction, '% Gold', normalizes each method's F1 by that method's own Gold F1 ceiling, which differs across methods because the in-KB mention subsets differ (e.g., KORE Gold F1 is 79.6 for OurYAGO but 88.0 for ChatEL). The paper explicitly acknowledges these differences and asserts that the percentage makes the proposals comparable, but that assertion concerns cross-method fairness of the comparison, not circularity: the '% Gold' value is a post-hoc normalization, not an input from which the disambiguation result is derived. Such comparability concerns belong to correctness risk, not to the circularity patterns enumerated here. No self-citation is load-bearing, and the only external scores taken from prior work are ChatEL's and ReFinED's reported results, which come from a different research group. The derivation chain is therefore self-contained against external benchmarks, with no self-definitional, fitted-input, or self-citation reduction.

Assumptions & free parameters 2 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 0 invented entities

No model parameters are fitted, so the ledger is light on numbers. The central claim depends on hand-set prompt choices, 250-character descriptions and candidate size 10, on the reliability of the LLM's greedy class choices, on the correctness and expressivity of the KG class annotations, and on the validity of the normalization used to compare methods across different KGs.

free parameters (2)

Entity description truncation length = 250 characters
Descriptions from Wikipedia are truncated at 250 characters before prompt construction, Section 4.1. No sensitivity analysis is reported; results may depend on this hand-set choice.
Candidate set size = 10
Candidate sets of size 10 are borrowed from ChatEL [12], a fixed comparability choice rather than a fitted parameter; it constrains the pruning algorithm's input.

assumptions (4)

domain assumption The LLM's multiple-choice responses during pruning are correct often enough that greedy, non-backtracking pruning does not compound fatal errors.
Algorithm 1 removes candidates at each LCA level based on single LLM responses; errors cannot be recovered. No backtracking or consistency check is provided.
domain assumption YAGO and DBpedia class hierarchies accurately represent the semantic types needed for disambiguation.
The pruning algorithm assumes that the gold entity's class path connects to the contextually correct class; Section 4.4 documents KG errors, e.g., Bounty annotated as Architectural Structure.
domain assumption Borrowed candidate sets from ChatEL [12] are suitable and identical for all compared methods.
Section 4.1 uses candidate sets generated by Wikipedia hyperlink counts plus BLINK from [12]; if these sets differ from those used in ChatEL's reported scores, comparisons are invalid.
ad hoc to paper Percentage of Gold F1 normalizes away differences in inKB test subsets, making cross-KG comparisons valid.
Section 4.1 defines % Gold to allow comparability between KGs, but Gold F1 denominators differ greatly across methods, Table 2, so this normalization does not establish an apples-to-apples comparison.

how reviews work

0 comments

Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Knowledge Graphs for Enhancing Large Language Models in Entity Disambiguation." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/BXZTMODD

@misc{pith2026250502737,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Knowledge Graphs for Enhancing Large Language Models in Entity Disambiguation},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/BXZTMODD}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2505.02737}
}

read the original abstract

Recent advances in Large Language Models (LLMs) have positioned them as a prominent solution for Natural Language Processing tasks. Notably, they can approach these problems in a zero or few-shot manner, thereby eliminating the need for training or fine-tuning task-specific models. However, LLMs face some challenges, including hallucination and the presence of outdated knowledge or missing information from specific domains in the training data. These problems cannot be easily solved by retraining the models with new data as it is a time-consuming and expensive process. To mitigate these issues, Knowledge Graphs (KGs) have been proposed as a structured external source of information to enrich LLMs. With this idea, in this work we use KGs to enhance LLMs for zero-shot Entity Disambiguation (ED). For that purpose, we leverage the hierarchical representation of the entities' classes in a KG to gradually prune the candidate space as well as the entities' descriptions to enrich the input prompt with additional factual knowledge. Our evaluation on popular ED datasets shows that the proposed method outperforms non-enhanced and description-only enhanced LLMs, and has a higher degree of adaptability than task-specific models. Furthermore, we conduct an error analysis and discuss the impact of the leveraged KG's semantic expressivity on the ED performance.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2505.02737 by the authors.

**Figure 1.** Overview of the two steps of our approach. Therefore, our contributions are as follows: – We present a method to enhance LLMs in the ED task by leveraging the candidate entity class taxonomies available in KGs. Moreover, we also augment the prompt with the entity descriptions, in order to allow the disambiguation of unseen or difficult entities. – We evaluate the method against non-enhanced LLMs, description-only e… view at source ↗

**Figure 2.** Overview of the steps for the creation of the DAG. the candidates are removed from G (see [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_2.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 3.** Example of the three different configurations of the LCA’s direct successors [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_3.png] view at source ↗

Figures from the paper (1 more)

**Figure 4.** Figure 4: Class representation of the entity Barcelona in DBpedia (left) and YAGO (right) KGs. Judge, Engineer, etc.). For instance, in the second iteration of the method for the sentence ‘As governor, Reagan raised taxes [...]’, the disambiguation is between the entity ‘Govern…

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

44 extracted references · 24 canonical work pages

[1]

Journal of Network and Computer Applications 185, 103076 (2021)

Abu-Salih, B.: Domain-specific knowledge graphs: A survey. Journal of Network and Computer Applications 185, 103076 (2021)

work page 2021
[2]

arXiv preprint arXiv:2303.08774 (2023)

Achiam, J., Adler, S., Agarwal, S., Ahmad, L., Akkaya, I., Aleman, F.L., Almeida, D., Altenschmidt, J., Altman, S., Anadkat, S., et al.: Gpt-4 technical report. arXiv preprint arXiv:2303.08774 (2023)

arXiv 2023
[3]

In: international semantic web conference

Auer, S., Bizer, C., Kobilarov, G., Lehmann, J., Cyganiak, R., Ives, Z.: Dbpedia: A nucleus for a web of open data. In: international semantic web conference. pp. 722–735. Springer (2007)

2007
[4]

Improving Entity Disambiguation by Reasoning over a Knowledge Base

Ayoola, T., Fisher, J., Pierleoni, A.: Improving entity disambiguation by reasoning over a knowledge base. arXiv preprint arXiv:2207.04106 (2022)

work page Pith review arXiv 2022
[5]

ReFinED: An Efficient Zero-shot-capable Approach to End-to-End Entity Linking

Ayoola, T., Tyagi, S., Fisher, J., Christodoulopoulos, C., Pierleoni, A.: Refined: An efficient zero-shot-capable approach to end-to-end entity linking. arXiv preprint arXiv:2207.04108 (2022)

work page Pith review arXiv 2022
[6]

arXiv preprint arXiv:2306.04136 (2023)

Baek, J., Aji, A.F., Saffari, A.: Knowledge-augmented language model prompting for zero-shot knowledge graph question answering. arXiv preprint arXiv:2306.04136 (2023)

arXiv 2023
[7]

In: Proceedings of the 60th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (Volume 1: Long Papers)

Barba, E., Procopio, L., Navigli, R.: Extend: Extractive entity disambiguation. In: Proceedings of the 60th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (Volume 1: Long Papers). pp. 2478–2488 (2022)

work page 2022
[8]

Advances in neural information processing systems 33, 1877–1901 (2020)

Brown, T., Mann, B., Ryder, N., Subbiah, M., Kaplan, J.D., Dhariwal, P., Nee- lakantan, A., Shyam, P., Sastry, G., Askell, A., et al.: Language models are few-shot learners. Advances in neural information processing systems 33, 1877–1901 (2020)

2020

Show all 44 references

[9]

In: Proceedings of the 2007 joint conference on empirical methods in natural language processing and computational natural language learning (EMNLP-CoNLL)

Cucerzan, S.: Large-scale named entity disambiguation based on wikipedia data. In: Proceedings of the 2007 joint conference on empirical methods in natural language processing and computational natural language learning (EMNLP-CoNLL). pp. 708–716 (2007)

2007
[10]

arXiv preprint arXiv:2010.00904 (2020)

De Cao, N., Izacard, G., Riedel, S., Petroni, F.: Autoregressive entity retrieval. arXiv preprint arXiv:2010.00904 (2020)

2020 arXiv
[11]

arXiv preprint arXiv:1810.04805 (2018) 2 https://github.com/doubleBlindReview2048/KGLLMs4ED Title Suppressed Due to Excessive Length 17

Devlin, J., Chang, M.W., Lee, K., Toutanova, K.: Bert: Pre-training of deep bidirec- tional transformers for language understanding. arXiv preprint arXiv:1810.04805 (2018) 2 https://github.com/doubleBlindReview2048/KGLLMs4ED Title Suppressed Due to Excessive Length 17

2018 arXiv
[12]

arXiv preprint arXiv:2402.14858 (2024)

Ding, Y., Zeng, Q., Weninger, T.: Chatel: Entity linking with chatbots. arXiv preprint arXiv:2402.14858 (2024)

2024 arXiv
[13]

Gabrilovich, E., Ringgaard, M., Subramanya, A.: Facc1: Freebase annotation of clueweb corpora, version 1 (release date 2013-06-26, format version 1, correction level 0) (06 2013)

2013
[14]

org: evolution of structured data on the web

Guha, R.V., Brickley, D., Macbeth, S.: Schema. org: evolution of structured data on the web. Communications of the ACM 59(2), 44–51 (2016)

2016
[15]

Semantic Web 9(4), 459–479 (2018)

Guo, Z., Barbosa, D.: Robust named entity disambiguation with random walks. Semantic Web 9(4), 459–479 (2018)

2018
[16]

Knowledge Graphs for eXplainable Artificial Intelligence pp

Heist, N., Hertling, S., Ringler, D., Paulheim, H.: Knowledge graphs on the web-an overview. Knowledge Graphs for eXplainable Artificial Intelligence pp. 3–22 (2020)

2020
[17]

In: Proceedings of the 21st ACM international conference on Information and knowledge management

Hoffart, J., Seufert, S., Nguyen, D.B., Theobald, M., Weikum, G.: Kore: keyphrase overlap relatedness for entity disambiguation. In: Proceedings of the 21st ACM international conference on Information and knowledge management. pp. 545–554 (2012)

2012
[18]

In: Proceedings of the 2011 conference on empirical methods in natural language processing

Hoffart, J., Yosef, M.A., Bordino, I., F¨ urstenau, H., Pinkal, M., Spaniol, M., Taneva, B., Thater, S., Weikum, G.: Robust disambiguation of named entities in text. In: Proceedings of the 2011 conference on empirical methods in natural language processing. pp. 782–792 (2011)

2011
[19]

IEEE Transactions on Knowledge and Data Engi- neering (2023)

Hu, L., Liu, Z., Zhao, Z., Hou, L., Nie, L., Li, J.: A survey of knowledge enhanced pre-trained language models. IEEE Transactions on Knowledge and Data Engi- neering (2023)

2023
[20]

ACM Computing Surveys 55(12), 1–38 (2023)

Ji, Z., Lee, N., Frieske, R., Yu, T., Su, D., Xu, Y., Ishii, E., Bang, Y.J., Madotto, A., Fung, P.: Survey of hallucination in natural language generation. ACM Computing Surveys 55(12), 1–38 (2023)

2023
[21]

arXiv preprint arXiv:1804.10637 (2018)

Le, P., Titov, I.: Improving entity linking by modeling latent relations between mentions. arXiv preprint arXiv:1804.10637 (2018)

2018 arXiv
[22]

arXiv preprint arXiv:1910.13461 (2019)

Lewis, M., Liu, Y., Goyal, N., Ghazvininejad, M., Mohamed, A., Levy, O., Stoyanov, V., Zettlemoyer, L.: Bart: Denoising sequence-to-sequence pre-training for natural language generation, translation, and comprehension. arXiv preprint arXiv:1910.13461 (2019)

2019 arXiv
[23]

Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 33, 9459–9474 (2020)

Lewis, P., Perez, E., Piktus, A., Petroni, F., Karpukhin, V., Goyal, N., K¨ uttler, H., Lewis, M., Yih, W.t., Rockt¨ aschel, T., et al.: Retrieval-augmented generation for knowledge-intensive nlp tasks. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 33, 9459–9474 (2020)

2020
[24]

arXiv preprint arXiv:1907.11692 (2019)

Liu, Y., Ott, M., Goyal, N., Du, J., Joshi, M., Chen, D., Levy, O., Lewis, M., Zettlemoyer, L., Stoyanov, V.: Roberta: A robustly optimized bert pretraining approach. arXiv preprint arXiv:1907.11692 (2019)

2019 arXiv
[25]

arXiv preprint arXiv:1906.07348 (2019)

Logeswaran, L., Chang, M.W., Lee, K., Toutanova, K., Devlin, J., Lee, H.: Zero- shot entity linking by reading entity descriptions. arXiv preprint arXiv:1906.07348 (2019)

2019 arXiv
[26]

arXiv preprint arXiv:2308.08747 (2023)

Luo, Y., Yang, Z., Meng, F., Li, Y., Zhou, J., Zhang, Y.: An empirical study of catastrophic forgetting in large language models during continual fine-tuning. arXiv preprint arXiv:2308.08747 (2023)

2023 arXiv
[27]

In: Proceedings of the 17th ACM conference on Information and knowledge management

Milne, D., Witten, I.H.: Learning to link with wikipedia. In: Proceedings of the 17th ACM conference on Information and knowledge management. pp. 509–518 (2008)

2008
[28]

Mistral AI: Mistral Large (2024), https://mistral.ai/news/mistral-large/

2024
[29]

In: 18 G

Mulang’, I.O., Singh, K., Prabhu, C., Nadgeri, A., Hoffart, J., Lehmann, J.: Evalu- ating the impact of knowledge graph context on entity disambiguation models. In: 18 G. Pons et al. Proceedings of the 29th ACM International Conference on Information & Knowl- edge Management. ...

2020
[30]

In: Semantic Web Evaluation Challenges: Second SemWebEval Challenge at ESWC 2015, Portoroˇ z, Slovenia, May 31-June 4, 2015, Revised Selected Papers

Nuzzolese, A.G., Gentile, A.L., Presutti, V., Gangemi, A., Garigliotti, D., Navigli, R.: Open knowledge extraction challenge. In: Semantic Web Evaluation Challenges: Second SemWebEval Challenge at ESWC 2015, Portoroˇ z, Slovenia, May 31-June 4, 2015, Revised Selected Papers. p...

2015
[31]

In: Semantic Web Evaluation Challenge, pp

Nuzzolese, A.G., Gentile, A.L., Presutti, V., Gangemi, A., Meusel, R., Paulheim, H.: The second open knowledge extraction challenge. In: Semantic Web Evaluation Challenge, pp. 3–16. Springer (2016)

2016
[32]

In: Proceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence

Onoe, Y., Durrett, G.: Fine-grained entity typing for domain independent entity linking. In: Proceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence. vol. 34, pp. 8576–8583 (2020)

2020
[33]

IEEE Transactions on Knowledge and Data Engineering (2024)

Pan, S., Luo, L., Wang, Y., Chen, C., Wang, J., Wu, X.: Unifying large language models and knowledge graphs: A roadmap. IEEE Transactions on Knowledge and Data Engineering (2024)

2024
[34]

In: Proceedings of the 49th annual meeting of the association for computational linguistics: Human language technologies

Ratinov, L., Roth, D., Downey, D., Anderson, M.: Local and global algorithms for disambiguation to wikipedia. In: Proceedings of the 49th annual meeting of the association for computational linguistics: Human language technologies. pp. 1375–1384 (2011)

2011
[35]

In: Proceedings of the 11th Knowledge Capture Conference

Ristoski, P., Lin, Z., Zhou, Q.: Kg-zeshel: knowledge graph-enhanced zero-shot entity linking. In: Proceedings of the 11th Knowledge Capture Conference. pp. 49–56 (2021)

2021
[36]

In: LREC

R¨ oder, M., Usbeck, R., Hellmann, S., Gerber, D., Both, A.: N 3-a collection of datasets for named entity recognition and disambiguation in the nlp interchange format. In: LREC. pp. 3529–3533 (2014)

2014
[37]

In: Proceedings of the AAAI conference on artificial intelligence

Speer, R., Chin, J., Havasi, C.: Conceptnet 5.5: An open multilingual graph of general knowledge. In: Proceedings of the AAAI conference on artificial intelligence. vol. 31 (2017)

2017
[38]

In: Proceedings of the 16th international conference on World Wide Web

Suchanek, F.M., Kasneci, G., Weikum, G.: Yago: a core of semantic knowledge. In: Proceedings of the 16th international conference on World Wide Web. pp. 697–706 (2007)

2007
[39]

arXiv preprint arXiv:2307.07697 (2023)

Sun, J., Xu, C., Tang, L., Wang, S., Lin, C., Gong, Y., Shum, H.Y., Guo, J.: Think- on-graph: Deep and responsible reasoning of large language model with knowledge graph. arXiv preprint arXiv:2307.07697 (2023)

2023 arXiv
[40]

arXiv preprint arXiv:2307.09288 (2023)

Touvron, H., Martin, L., Stone, K., Albert, P., Almahairi, A., Babaei, Y., Bash- lykov, N., Batra, S., Bhargava, P., Bhosale, S., et al.: Llama 2: Open foundation and fine-tuned chat models. arXiv preprint arXiv:2307.09288 (2023)

2023 arXiv
[41]

Com- munications of the ACM 57(10), 78–85 (2014)

Vrandeˇ ci´ c, D., Kr¨ otzsch, M.: Wikidata: a free collaborative knowledgebase. Com- munications of the ACM 57(10), 78–85 (2014)

2014
[42]

arXiv preprint arXiv:2308.09729 (2023)

Wen, Y., Wang, Z., Sun, J.: Mindmap: Knowledge graph prompting sparks graph of thoughts in large language models. arXiv preprint arXiv:2308.09729 (2023)

2023 arXiv
[43]

arXiv preprint arXiv:1911.03814 (2019)

Wu, L., Petroni, F., Josifoski, M., Riedel, S., Zettlemoyer, L.: Scalable zero-shot entity linking with dense entity retrieval. arXiv preprint arXiv:1911.03814 (2019)

2019 arXiv
[44]

ACM Transactions on Knowledge Discovery from Data (2023)

Yang, J., Jin, H., Tang, R., Han, X., Feng, Q., Jiang, H., Zhong, S., Yin, B., Hu, X.: Harnessing the power of llms in practice: A survey on chatgpt and beyond. ACM Transactions on Knowledge Discovery from Data (2023)

2023

Pith tools

Reviewed August 16, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.

[1] [1]

Journal of Network and Computer Applications 185, 103076 (2021)

Abu-Salih, B.: Domain-specific knowledge graphs: A survey. Journal of Network and Computer Applications 185, 103076 (2021)

work page 2021

[2] [2]

arXiv preprint arXiv:2303.08774 (2023)

Achiam, J., Adler, S., Agarwal, S., Ahmad, L., Akkaya, I., Aleman, F.L., Almeida, D., Altenschmidt, J., Altman, S., Anadkat, S., et al.: Gpt-4 technical report. arXiv preprint arXiv:2303.08774 (2023)

arXiv 2023

[3] [3]

In: international semantic web conference

Auer, S., Bizer, C., Kobilarov, G., Lehmann, J., Cyganiak, R., Ives, Z.: Dbpedia: A nucleus for a web of open data. In: international semantic web conference. pp. 722–735. Springer (2007)

2007

[4] [4]

Improving Entity Disambiguation by Reasoning over a Knowledge Base

Ayoola, T., Fisher, J., Pierleoni, A.: Improving entity disambiguation by reasoning over a knowledge base. arXiv preprint arXiv:2207.04106 (2022)

work page Pith review arXiv 2022

[5] [5]

ReFinED: An Efficient Zero-shot-capable Approach to End-to-End Entity Linking

Ayoola, T., Tyagi, S., Fisher, J., Christodoulopoulos, C., Pierleoni, A.: Refined: An efficient zero-shot-capable approach to end-to-end entity linking. arXiv preprint arXiv:2207.04108 (2022)

work page Pith review arXiv 2022

[6] [6]

arXiv preprint arXiv:2306.04136 (2023)

Baek, J., Aji, A.F., Saffari, A.: Knowledge-augmented language model prompting for zero-shot knowledge graph question answering. arXiv preprint arXiv:2306.04136 (2023)

arXiv 2023

[7] [7]

In: Proceedings of the 60th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (Volume 1: Long Papers)

Barba, E., Procopio, L., Navigli, R.: Extend: Extractive entity disambiguation. In: Proceedings of the 60th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (Volume 1: Long Papers). pp. 2478–2488 (2022)

work page 2022

[8] [8]

Advances in neural information processing systems 33, 1877–1901 (2020)

Brown, T., Mann, B., Ryder, N., Subbiah, M., Kaplan, J.D., Dhariwal, P., Nee- lakantan, A., Shyam, P., Sastry, G., Askell, A., et al.: Language models are few-shot learners. Advances in neural information processing systems 33, 1877–1901 (2020)

2020