Papers › Revisiting Inferential Benchmarks for Knowledge Graph Completion

Revisiting Inferential Benchmarks for Knowledge Graph Completion

7 Jun 2023arXiv:2306.04814archive 2025-07-28

Shuwen Liu, Bernardo Cuenca Grau, Ian Horrocks, Egor V. Kostylev

Knowledge Graph (KG) completion is the problem of extending an incomplete KG with missing facts. A key feature of Machine Learning approaches for KG completion is their ability to learn inference patterns, so that the predicted facts are the results of applying these patterns to the KG. Standard completion benchmarks, however, are not well-suited for evaluating models' abilities to learn patterns, because the training and test sets of these benchmarks are a random split of a given KG and hence do not capture the causality of inference patterns. We propose a novel approach for designing KG completion benchmarks based on the following principles: there is a set of logical rules so that the missing facts are the results of the rules' application; the training set includes both premises matching rule antecedents and the corresponding conclusions; the test set consists of the results of applying the rules to the training set; the negative examples are designed to discourage the models from learning rules not entailed by the rule set. We use our methodology to generate several benchmarks and evaluate a wide range of existing KG completion systems. Our results provide novel insights on the ability of existing models to induce inference patterns from incomplete KGs.

Code

Repository list and official/mentioned flags are the archive's, frozen 2025-07-28. Reachability, where shown, is from one Syntology probe window (2026-09-16 to 2026-09-18); repositories not probed show nothing. GitHub stars are not tracked.

Code Syntology ran Syntology

4 samples harvested; 0 ran; 0 honoured the contract we drafted; 4 have no recorded run. Read from Syntology's graph 2026-09-24; that is when this build read the record, not when the samples ran.

Licence: 0 of the 4 samples are pointer only, meaning Syntology does not serve that copy's text. This page shows no code text for any sample; each one links to its file in the repository.

Harvested from shuwen-liu-ox/loginfer. “Ran” means the sample executed on a synthesized input. It does not mean the output is correct, and nothing here reproduces the paper's results. “Honoured” and “violated” refer to a contract Syntology drafted from the code itself; “our draft was wrong” and “fixture could not drive it” are failures of Syntology's instrument, not of the code.

Each sample ends with its code_sha256, Syntology's identity for that exact code. An agent fetches the stored sample with Syntology's MCP tool get_code(code_sha256="…") (how to connect); click an identity to copy that call.

Repository labels, per sample. official repository: The archive marks this repository official for the paper. named in the paper: The archive records that the paper mentions this repository; it is not marked official. community (archive-listed): In the archive's code links for this paper, not marked official and not recorded as mentioned in the paper. found in paper text by Syntology: Syntology found this repository in the paper's own text; whether it is the authors' implementation is not asserted. community: Not in the archive's code links for this paper; a community repository Syntology harvested. Samples from a repository marked official are listed first. Licence labels name the repository's licence as recorded at harvest. “Pointer only” means Syntology does not serve that copy's text, for one of four reasons: no licence file was found; the licence was not identified; the licence is recorded as permissive but that copy's record is not marked cleared; or the licence is outside the permissive list Syntology serves text under (MIT, Apache-2.0, BSD and similar). Some licences outside that list permit redistribution, such as WTFPL, and GPL-3.0 under its conditions; they are simply not on the list. Hover a licence label for the reason. File links open the file on GitHub at the default branch, which may have changed since the harvest.

Tasks

Results from the paper archive 2025-07-28

No leaderboard rows for this paper in the archive.

Methods

Report a problem or propose a change · a person checks every report against the paper or source before anything changes; decisions are listed on /corrections